Bumpy track at COTA: how serious is the problem?

[tdshimo]

My view is that the bumps at COTA, particularly those in the esses complex into T6, and T10, are a serious problem that needs to be addressed before racing there again. I think it's a major safety issue (to say nothing of DNFs), one that will only get worse as time passes, and will be exacerbated by the dimensions of the 2022 cars. I'm in a debate with others who disagree. So, I thought I'd come here for a more reasoned discussion of the technical elements, and ask: how serious is the problem? Am I exaggerating the issue? Am I missing something in my reasoning?

My argument, in bullet points:

• COTA's bumps are problematic because they're big (amplitude), happen in rapid succession at speed (frequency), and happen at points in the track where you're calling on the tires to make turns (rather than just on a long straight.
• F1 cars can handle bumps, and can be reinforced for bumpy tracks, but the nature of the bumps makes them exceptionally dangerous for formula cars.
• Bottoming-out repeatedly in formula cars as they go through high-speed turns is a safety issue. We can't have cars sliding-around on permaglass and carbon fibre when they're doing 245kph/150mph through a corner.
• Aero doesn't save you when the tires aren't in contact with the track surface.
• Platform control/setup gives you a lot of things to change, but there are upper limits that are dictated by the cars' architecture and performance standards.
• You can change ride height and preload, but you really only have 50/80mm F/R of bump travel.
• Running higher spring rates and rebound introduces new problems, mostly with respect to performance overall, but also reliability.
• Dialing-out downforce has a material impact on performance around the whole circuit.
• DNFs and car reliability are a secondary issue, but an issue nonetheless (we had 3 DNFs in the 2021 USGP due to the bumps. Gasly's DNF counts).
• The bumps get bumpier with continued subsidence at the track over time, so next year will be worse.
• The whole problem is amplified by the 2022 cars: longer wheelbase, and smaller tire sidewalls (so fewer levers to pull with respect to setup).

Given this, I think COTA's bumps are a big - and worsening - problem, and they need to be fixed before F1 races there in 2022. But am I exaggerating the problem? Am I wrong on my points? Am I missing something? ("Unless I'm very much mistaken, I am very much mistaken.")

I appreciate your insights on this - thanks!

Some context here: this is my first post, but I've been lurking for some time. I've been a Formula One fan since the late '90s (and a rabid fan since around '05) have been to several races (including having had the opportunity to pore over disassembled cars in the paddock garages, pre-hybrid), I used to build/fix club rally cars for a driver in SCCA club rallies, I understand vehicle dynamics and car control (or, I hope I do), and have a novice's understanding of the technical elements of setup and platform control (at least, I strive to). So I'm new to the forum, but not at all new to the sport.

[rscsr]

Imho they aren't a big problem. It's just something that sets the track apart a bit. If the teams need to change their suspension then so be it. Or if their cars are falling apart that's the team's problem tbh. These are prototypes and built for the tracks. Or they should be. And I also don't understand when they say, that the curbs on some tracks rattle their cars apart. Then they should build a more suitable car imho.

[TimW]

I agree with rscsr, they are just part of the challenge. Unless bumps arise that can really launch a car, like we saw with sausage curbs in the past, or they are in a dangerous high speed corner without runoff, I do not see much of an issue. For my part they could have cobblestone like the Rouen hairpin

The only real issue I see is the health of the drivers, their backs and brains need to survive. Maybe they should mandate an accelerometer in their seats and put limits on that (which would force teams to adjust suspension)

[Sieper]

Good post and always nice to see someone join! It is hard for me to judge how big of an problem it is. But I will say this, I enormously enjoyed those super slow-mo shots we got all weekend long of that one corner where the cars were all on the limit, tires twisting, cars heaving. Great footage.

[El Scorchio]

Did the bumps cause many accidents or damage to cars/DNFs?

Only the Alpines and Gasly didn't finish the race, so perhaps there was a weakness in the Alpine car that the track revealed, (so if their cars aren't well equipped enough to survive a track then it's on them rather than the track) but I wouldn't say it was a problem for the 2021 cars at all. Had you had 6-8 cars minimum all breaking because of the track then you'd have to look into it a bit more but ultimately it's on the teams trading off strength for speed. The could absolutely build a car to easily survive any track but it wouldn't be as fast. All about risk management.

For 2022, the teams need to make sure they engineer the cars and components well enough to take what all the tracks throw at them, including COTA.

[El Scorchio]

And I also don't understand when they say, that the curbs on some tracks rattle their cars apart. Then they should build a more suitable car imho.

Absolutely- or stay off the curbs.

[Scorpaguy]

Is the track bumpy...yes.

Do F1 teams have good engineers...yes.

Are F1 drivers supposed to be top tier...yes.

When one stands trackside at COTA...it looks glass smooth....at 200KPH+ the bumps become quite evident. The bumps exist because of underlying lenses of clay in the subsoil causing heave and subsidence. COTA's strategy is to shave the areas of "heave". However, the areas of the track affected by this are not consistent; a "heave" today may be a "subsidence" tomorrow - or- an unaffected area of the track today may succumb to clay woes tomorrow. Some drivers like Ham decry the circuit as too dangerous to race upon. Others like Ric proclaim the bumps to be no more than "character".

I think we should remember that all tracks have issues...Monaco's many faults make passing nearly impossible, many circuits have ambient temps that keep some cars from running at their peak aero-wise, many circuits are sand-strewn, many circuits become lakes with just a pit of precip, Spa's Eau Rouge can be driven at speed only by those with size XL genitalia, etc. Furthermore, circuits used to incorporate elements such as off-camber turns, blind crests, pinch apexes, etc. (all of which could be characterized as "dangerous" if not properly driven). IMHO, a few bumps that seem to be manageable (for which they seem to be for all of F1) may be a good thing. Moto GP, now that is a different story.

[Edax]

Well the bumps on the track do give it a very American character. To follow perhaps Montreal should dig some potholes in theirs.

Seriously, I do like it when a track present some unforeseen challenges to the teams. When the teams and the drivers really have to work together to get a suitable setup. Which is a part of the sport which IMO is getting lost with the ever increasing quality of simulations.

But I think COTA is a bit too much. The problem is not the severity of the isolated bumps, but that they seem to form in resonance structures. I don’t think getting over them fast is a sign of skill, more of car characteristics and a bit of luck. So if something is a risk for the drivers / cars and not a promotor of driving skill, it probably doesn’t belong on a track.

[tdshimo]

Thanks for the responses. I'm glad I posted here, because what I've learned from you guys has changed my perspective on the issue. I'm definitely exaggerating the problem, although I reserve some judgment until we see what happens with resurfacing at COTA, and how the 2022 cars perform next year.

Imho they aren't a big problem. It's just something that sets the track apart a bit. If the teams need to change their suspension then so be it...Then they should build a more suitable car imho.

Thanks for your thoughts. I'm starting to see that I've probably exaggerated the issue. Still, to the point of "a more suitable car," my sense is that bumps like COTA's are so large that a suitable car starts to hit the upper-limit of the car formula. Like, they haven't got many options for adjustments before they're exceeding the technical regs.

Unless bumps arise that can really launch a car, like we saw with sausage curbs in the past, or they are in a dangerous high speed corner without runoff, I do not see much of an issue. [...]

The only real issue I see is the health of the drivers, their backs and brains need to survive. Maybe they should mandate an accelerometer in their seats and put limits on that (which would force teams to adjust suspension)

You make a good point in this, that they're not quite as bad as sausage curbs, and there is plenty of runoff. But it's not the available runoff that concerns me as much as it can lead to multi-car accidents. And I'm all-in for driver safety, but I've only ever heard that the bumps are tiring and stressful, not that they're causing major strains and things like concussions.

Good post and always nice to see someone join! It is hard for me to judge how big of an problem it is. But I will say this, I enormously enjoyed those super slow-mo shots we got all weekend long of that one corner where the cars were all on the limit, tires twisting, cars heaving. Great footage.

Thanks! Yeah, I loved seeing the cars twist and flex, with the legality planks slamming into the asphalt. So cool to see how the forces are distributed, and how that shows up in the cars' torquing around.

Only the Alpines and Gasly didn't finish the race, so perhaps there was a weakness in the Alpine car that the track revealed, (so if their cars aren't well equipped enough to survive a track then it's on them rather than the track) [...]ultimately it's on the teams trading off strength for speed. The could absolutely build a car to easily survive any track but it wouldn't be as fast. All about risk management.

For 2022, the teams need to make sure they engineer the cars and components well enough to take what all the tracks throw at them, including COTA.

Yeah, the "trade-off" factor is part of my argument, that perhaps too much trade-off needs to be made. But I take your points.

Is the track bumpy...yes.

Do F1 teams have good engineers...yes.

Are F1 drivers supposed to be top tier...yes.

When one stands trackside at COTA...it looks glass smooth....at 200KPH+ the bumps become quite evident. The bumps exist because of underlying lenses of clay in the subsoil causing heave and subsidence. COTA's strategy is to shave the areas of "heave". However, the areas of the track affected by this are not consistent; a "heave" today may be a "subsidence" tomorrow - or- an unaffected area of the track today may succumb to clay woes tomorrow. Some drivers like Ham decry the circuit as too dangerous to race upon. Others like Ric proclaim the bumps to be no more than "character".

I think we should remember that all tracks have issues...Monaco's many faults make passing nearly impossible, many circuits have ambient temps that keep some cars from running at their peak aero-wise, many circuits are sand-strewn, many circuits become lakes with just a pit of precip, Spa's Eau Rouge can be driven at speed only by those with size XL genitalia, etc. Furthermore, circuits used to incorporate elements such as off-camber turns, blind crests, pinch apexes, etc. (all of which could be characterized as "dangerous" if not properly driven). IMHO, a few bumps that seem to be manageable (for which they seem to be for all of F1) may be a good thing. Moto GP, now that is a different story.

I certainly understand that F1 has top-tier talent - both engineers and drivers - and that their design+manufacturing is more than capable of building cars suitable for all circuits in the season, and one-off cars for the outliers. But, as above, my sense is that we're maybe approaching the edge of the design envelope, especially when considering the nature of COTA's bumps. Yes, absolutely, most tracks have issues, and we often love the way those issues lend to the track's respective character, but I do feel like the frequency and amplitude of COTA's bumps are pretty extreme relative to the cars' design/the formula. But points well taken.

Per the subsidence at COTA, yep, I have dug-into the issue (no pun intended), and I understand the causes, and the mitigations that COTA has implemented (or abandoned, like the drainage). I remember when they first turned shovels at the site, and the discussion was that it was a good location, but a sub-optimal one for many reasons, including the subsidence issue. I also remember, in 2012 standing with tickets in hand, two months before the race, praying that the FIA inspection would succeed... and then, praying that Tavo Hellmund would actually finish the facility in time for the race. Dude pulled it off, but it seemed like only just.

But I think COTA is a bit too much. The problem is not the severity of the isolated bumps, but that they seem to form in resonance structures. I don’t think getting over them fast is a sign of skill, more of car characteristics and a bit of luck. So if something is a risk for the drivers / cars and not a promotor of driving skill, it probably doesn’t belong on a track.

Yes, this is at the crux of my argument: that COTA's bumps are uniquely bad/dangerous, because of the nature of the bumps themselves, and the cars' overall design formula. It's how big the bumps are, combined with the rate they hit the cars at speed, and then, the sheer number of them. The "resonance structures" are absolutely something I was looking for, wondering if one car would have the a natural frequency align and hit a bad harmonic and *really* get crossed-up. In the end, I determined that the cars would only hit that harmonic if they were going much, much faster... but then I started thinking about the 2022 cars' length and tire sidewalls, so the question remains open (perhaps). And haha on digging potholes in Montreal. Does it need any more character than it already has ?

Thanks, all, for your perspective!

[noname]

COTA is used not only by F1. MotoGP is racing there as well, and MotoGP riders were very vocal of COTA's shortcomings. Even track boss, Bobby Epstein, admitted bumps are an issue for bikes.

[SiLo]

I think the bumps are extreme, and should be remedied, but only the major ones. Seeing cars have stress failures or even retire is not what I want to see, as much as these teams are meant to be the best of the best.

[Big Tea]

I think the bumps are extreme, and should be remedied, but only the major ones. Seeing cars have stress failures or even retire is not what I want to see, as much as these teams are meant to be the best of the best.

I think there are not many of us who feel the same, that this is the track, you adapt your car to race on it not the track to the car.

We went through a period (still are?) where fans complain all tracks are the same, but if they are altered to fit the cars' liking they will converge and change together when there is a new design and be 'all the same' again.

Safety of course has to play a part, but removing bumps is not the only way to prevent accidents.

[Steven]

I agree with rscsr, they are just part of the challenge. Unless bumps arise that can really launch a car, like we saw with sausage curbs in the past, or they are in a dangerous high speed corner without runoff, I do not see much of an issue. For my part they could have cobblestone like the Rouen hairpin

The only real issue I see is the health of the drivers, their backs and brains need to survive. Maybe they should mandate an accelerometer in their seats and put limits on that (which would force teams to adjust suspension)

They already have accelerometers in the earplugs. You might have a good point here that a meter in the seat could provide valuable input, especially when comparing it to the input from the ear. I guess you'd be able to "calculate" the compression of the spine on a bump.

[basti313]

I think the bumps are extreme, and should be remedied, but only the major ones. Seeing cars have stress failures or even retire is not what I want to see, as much as these teams are meant to be the best of the best.

Well, if you want to see bullet proof go to Indy car. They have no issues since the big bump at T10 was repaved. This was the only safety issue.

For F1: Michael Schumacher once said after his Merc broke down, that this is normal as they are racing prototypes.
The Merc since 5 years is more reliable than any road car...I do not know what this has to do with the pinnacle of Motorsports, with building to the absolute limits of speed.
It is more than ok, that they have to change the ride height, repair small cracks, damage parts. This is what you need to do even in GT3 racing...

[SiLo]

I think the bumps are extreme, and should be remedied, but only the major ones. Seeing cars have stress failures or even retire is not what I want to see, as much as these teams are meant to be the best of the best.

Well, if you want to see bullet proof go to Indy car. They have no issues since the big bump at T10 was repaved. This was the only safety issue.

For F1: Michael Schumacher once said after his Merc broke down, that this is normal as they are racing prototypes.
The Merc since 5 years is more reliable than any road car...I do not know what this has to do with the pinnacle of Motorsports, with building to the absolute limits of speed.
It is more than ok, that they have to change the ride height, repair small cracks, damage parts. This is what you need to do even in GT3 racing...

I didn't say I don't like reliability issues, which really, I do, but I understand it happens. I just find it looks silly when the cars are bouncing all over the place, it makes the track looks poorly maintained. All we need after that is a suspension failure for a very big accident.

Small bumps are fine. Big bumps are simply dangerous.