Gary Anderson

[Alfaster-F1]

[amperimetro]

Es par de fuerza, se refiere a la energía que es capaz de almacenar un elemento antes de liberar toda su fuerza ante una fractura, por ejemplo un palier, transmite toda la potencia del motor a las ruedas y están fabricados en carbono por ser el material más resistente a torsiones, su punto de fractura está muy por encima del acero y aparte segun su composición puede tener caracteristicas más flexibles según sea el elemento fabricado y el fin que andamos buscando.

realmente, el torque, es la capacidad de friccion entre dos elementos, lo que trasladado al tema motores seria el par motor o la capacidad de las bielas de mandar la potencia al cigueñal....

[Alfaster-F1]

Gracias por la aclaración amperímetro.


Saludos.

[maripi]

Hungarian GP: Gary Anderson explains the Red Bull engine row
By Gary Anderson BBC F1 technical analyst

Red Bull arrived at the Hungarian Grand Prix at the centre of a storm over controversial engine settings they were running in Germany last weekend.

In the few days between the races, a new rule has been issued to stop Red Bull and engine supplier Renault doing what they were.

But what was that, and what effect will the new rule have on their performance?

It is to do with the torque curve of the engine - how it delivers the power through the rear wheels - and what effect changing that can have on the driveability of the car and its aerodynamic performance.

What Red Bull and Renault were doing was smoothing out the torque curve to ensure the best possible driveability.

Each team's airbox and exhaust configuration affects the engine's performance and creates peaks and troughs in the torque curve.

So the engine manufacturer will do as much work as possible to optimise the car in whatever specification a team is using to make the car as responsive for the driver as possible.

Changing the torque curve can also have an effect on the aerodynamics of the car because it affects the relationship between the power delivery of the engine and the throttle.

Most top teams have an exhaust set-up that blows gases on to aerodynamic parts at the rear of the car to increase downforce.

If a team or driver doesn't want all the torque, they have to use less throttle.

But if a team can set up the car to have more throttle opening for a given torque output, that will flow more air through the exhaust pipes, which works on the rear brake ducts and outboard edge of the diffuser to create more downforce.

What they are trying to do is protect the rear tyres from spinning and at the same time create as much downforce as possible from the rear of the car.


“In qualifying, it would probably be very small differences, but it will be more difficult for Red Bull to look after the rear tyres in the race”

Gary Anderson BBC F1 technical analyst

So in the example of Red Bull in Germany, if you have less torque output for a given throttle opening, you are reducing wheelspin, which increases tyre life, but getting more downforce because the throttle will be further open for less torque delivery.

To use an extreme example, say the car would normally go through a corner at 50% throttle because the driver wants 50% torque. What you might want is to be driving the corner with the throttle, say, 90% open but still the same torque output from the engine.

That way there is a lot more air going through the engine for the same torque delivery. And then when you open the throttle the remaining 10%, that takes you from 50% torque to 100%.

The numbers involved in the Red Bull-Renault case are not as extreme as that - I understand the variation was more like 10% between the throttle opening and the torque output - but would still have an effect.

The reason the FIA was upset about this was that they had always interpreted the relevant regulation to mean that at 100% throttle the engine had to provide 100% of the torque of which it was ultimately capable.

So the FIA saw the Red Bull's engine settings in Germany and saw that it was producing less torque than it had in previous races, and they felt this was illegal.

But Red Bull and Renault interpreted the rule to mean the engine could not deliver less torque than it was programmed to deliver on that day. That was another way it could be read, so they got away with it.

The new regulation imposed from this race onwards says teams have to provide a "reference" map from one of the first four races of the year, and that the torque of the engine at any race from then on cannot vary by more than 2% from that reference.

There is still some argument going on, with some of the engine manufacturers saying 2% is not enough of a margin for the changes they would like to do to account for the differences in ambient temperature and atmospheric conditions at various circuits.

But while that 2% number might change a little, the rule will be staying for the rest of the season.

There is no doubt this change will affect Red Bull more than any other team, because they were changing their torque settings more than anyone else.

However, it is impossible to quantify either how much they benefited from doing this, or how much they will lose as a result of it being banned.

Over one lap in qualifying, it would probably be very small differences, but it will be more difficult for them to look after the rear tyres in the race.

It's also true to say Red Bull did not look very good in first practice in Hungary, on a track which should suit their car.

It's too early to draw any conclusions from that.

But what you can say is that they were doing a lot of mechanical changes to their set-up, more than I have seen them do for a considerable amount of time, and the car did not look that good out on the track.

It will be fascinating to watch their progress through the weekend in Hungary.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19014325

[maripi]

Hungarian GP: Lewis Hamilton delivers but beware Lotus
By Gary Anderson BBC F1 technical analyst

Lewis Hamilton was always going to win the Hungarian Grand Prix as long as he did not make any mistakes.

That is the advantage that pole position buys you at the Hungaroring - and Hamilton delivered a brilliant qualifying lap on Saturday to secure it by nearly half a second.

He nearly got sucked into an error at the first corner when he locked his inside front wheel and ran wide but he managed to survive it, largely because there was a battle going on behind him and he was already a long way clear.

From then on, it was about making the right strategy calls and controlling the race.

The Hungaroring is one of those tracks where it's so hard to overtake that if you have a decently quick car and you don't make any mistakes and you're at the front at the end of the first lap, you're probably going to make it.

But the two Lotus cars had opportunities out of which they did not make the most.


Both Romain Grosjean and Kimi Raikkonen were quick at the end of their second stints. The team brought Raikkonen in when they did because they felt that the edge had gone from his tyres and Hamilton's were just beginning to come on song.

But had they kept Raikkonen out for a couple more laps, they would have not lost anything and might have got that bit closer to Hamilton to make a difference.

By doing that, it would also have ensured Raikkonen had tyres that were that bit fresher for the last stint, which would have given him a slightly better chance in the closing laps.

The problem in Hungary is that the corners are so long. That means the driver behind loses too much ground because of the downforce he is losing following another car and cannot challenge down the next straight.

But the Lotuses showed very strong pace and they are going to be a force to be reckoned with in the final nine races.

They are already very quick and at the next race in Belgium on 2 September following the summer break they are expected to race the straight-line speed boosting innovation they have tested at the last two races in Germany and Hungary.

This is a device that ducts in air from above the driver's head and uses it to 'stall' the rear wing, boosting straight-line speed.
Drivers' championship

1. F Alonso - Ferrari 164

2. M Webber - Red Bull 124

3. S Vettel - Red Bull 122

4. L Hamilton - McLaren 117

5. K Raikkonen - Lotus-Renault 116

6. N Rosberg - Mercedes 77

7. J Button - McLaren 76

8. R Grosjean - Lotus-Renault 76

9. S Perez - Sauber 47

10. K Kobayashi - Sauber 33

It is in addition to the DRS overtaking device that all teams use - it's a kind of DRS-plus - and it will be especially effective at the next two races in Spa and Monza because of the long straights on those tracks.

So the other teams had better watch out.

Hamilton's victory puts him back into fourth place in the championship ahead of Raikkonen, but you would have to say the Finn is a title contender. I think team-mate Grosjean is too inexperienced to challenge - and he is also 40 points further behind.

Championship leader Fernando Alonso's Ferrari was not competitive in Hungary. As usual, he did the best he could with fifth place, and actually extended his advantage over second-placed Mark Webber of Red Bull, but the others all closed in a little.

You don't have to win every race to do well in this championship: the Lotus is a really good car and I don't see why Raikkonen cannot close that gap down.

He has had a few shaky races, but you have to remember that he has been away in rallying for two years and F1 has changed a lot in that time.

I've got a bit of a weak spot for Raikkonen - he's the kind of driver who if you make the car 0.1 seconds quicker, he will find you 0.2secs.

Now he is back up to speed and you can see the glint in his eye a little bit.
RED BULL CONTROVERSIES

Red Bull were the focus of a lot of attention in Hungary after the technical row over their engine mapping in Germany the previous week.

Fourth for Sebastian Vettel and eighth for Webber is not the result they will have been hoping for - or that they should have got, given the speed of the car.

They were right to start Webber, who had qualified down in 11th, on the harder tyre but they stopped him too early on lap 20.

Had he gone a bit further - which he could have done - it would have meant they had the biggest possible window if the predicted rain came and it would have meant his stint at the end of the race on the soft tyres would have been short.

But because they stopped him early at his first and second stops, it meant he had to do a third stop to fit another set of soft tyres before the end.

Vettel also did a third stop but for him it made sense, as it meant he had fresher tyres at the end and he would have been able to gain a position had Hamilton, Raikkonen or Grosjean run into tyre problems in the closing laps. It was just that they did not, as it turned out.

The big mystery about Red Bull remains why they had such outstanding pace in Valencia at the end of June, where Vettel was 1.5secs faster than anyone else before he retired - and where that has gone.

The next track, Spa, has Red Bull stamped all over it.

They will have time to clear their head over the summer break, take stock of the last three races and where they need to do better, and that is where we will find out where they are.

Spa starts the run-in to the end of the season and the teams will be able to bring one big update to that race. After that the races come so thick and fast it will be dotting the i's and crossing the t's.

The Belgian Grand prix will be judgement day for a lot of people.

[Alfaster-F1]

[Alfaster-F1]

"I haven't seen the device Red Bull are said to have had that could have allowed them to manually adjust the ride-height, but what is being talked about is a very unusual thing.

"The front suspension is very complicated, with rockers, torsion bars, upright adjusters, side dampers, anti-roll bar and a third spring that stops the car touching the ground.

"Because of that, to adjust the ride-height teams usually just adjust the push-rod, as it allows you to leave the geometry alone. So inboard on the chassis is a very strange place to put a ride-height adjuster.

"What it might have been is an adjuster for the bump rubbers, which define when the car will hit the ground.

"It's important because aerodynamic performance is defined by the front ride-height, but you have to run it higher in qualifying than is ideal for ultimate qualifying performance because of the 150kg of fuel you need for the race. If you could adjust the ride-height between qualifying and race, it could give you an advantage in the region of 0.3 seconds a lap in qualifying."


Gary Anderson BBC F1's technical analyst on the latest row involving Red Bull

[Alfaster-F1]

Why Mercedes are struggling

The Hungarian Grand Prix was a new low for Mercedes in a season that, over the last few races, has been a story of consistent decline.

It was, first of all, a bit of an embarrassing race for Michael Schumacher.

The aborted start was caused by him stopping in the wrong grid position. He then erroneously switched his engine off - thinking of procedures that applied in the last decade when he was at Ferrari but which have now changed because of different rules.

Starting from the pit lane, Schumacher then got a puncture and incurred a speeding penalty when he came in for new tyres.

But those are just simple mistakes. Much more concerning has been the team's general downward trend in competitiveness.

Mercedes started the season promisingly, with some good qualifying results at the first two races, and then took a dominant win with Nico Rosberg at the Chinese Grand Prix.

At that time, there was a lot of attention on their clever 'double DRS' system.

This links the rear-wing drag-reduction overtaking aid that is on all cars with the front wing to give an extra boost in straight-line speed by reducing the front wing performance as well as the rear.

Back in March, the system aroused a lot of controversy, as many of Mercedes' rivals thought it was illegal - and still do.
Michael Schumacher at the Hungarian Grand Prix

Michael Schumacher at the Hungarian Grand Prix

When the FIA declared they were happy with it, the expectation was that the other top teams would quickly follow suit. But that hasn't happened.

In the meantime, things have gone downhill for Mercedes. Apart from a strong showing in Monaco, they have never looked close to winning again, and in the last few races they have got slower and slower compared to the other teams.

The nadir was Hungary, where Rosberg and Schumacher qualified 13th and 17th and the car was nowhere near the pace.

Even when the car was qualifying in the top six or so, there was a general trend to Mercedes's weekends - the car was much more competitive in qualifying than in the race.

That has changed a little in recent races but at the same time the car's general competitiveness has gone backwards.

That's because they have developed themselves in a direction to go slower, all because they have been trying to get more consistency from the rear tyres to help race performance. And that is linked to the 'double DRS'.
WHAT WAS THE INITIAL PROBLEM?
Rosberg in Hungary

Rosberg in Hungary

Let's analyse what I believe are potential flaws in the 'double DRS', and then work out what has gone wrong as Mercedes tried to fix them.

To do that, we have to start with its benefits.

First of all, the system flatters the car in qualifying, when DRS use is free.

Firstly, because of the extra straight-line speed boost it provides by reducing drag.

And secondly because it balances the car in certain fast corners that, normally, a driver cannot take flat because the car would have too much oversteer (when it feels like it's going to spin). Reducing the effectiveness of the front wing makes the car less 'pointy', so the driver can go through those corners faster.

But in the races, drivers can use DRS only in the designated zone, and only when they are within a second of the car in front.

So because the 'double DRS' was helping Mercedes in qualifying, they will automatically lose more pace relative to the other cars in the race, when it is generally not available.

Quite apart from flattering the car in qualifying, there are also some significant compromises to the system itself.

Firstly, it creates an inherent understeer in the car - lack of front-end grip - because when the driver closes the DRS as he brakes for the corner, the rear wing immediately goes back to producing its maximum downforce, so the rear grip returns immediately, whereas the front wing has a slight delay.

That's because the front wing is connected to the rear wing by a series of pipes running the length of the car.

Before the front wing can work at its full effectiveness, the pressure under it - which includes the volume of air that is in the pipes to the rear wing - has to reduce. Only then will the underside of the front wing reach its lowest pressure, and create the most downforce and grip.

That delay does not happen in the race, because the DRS is not in use, so the car becomes 'oversteery'. So in the first part of the season Mercedes were suffering with a loose rear end in races, which created excessive rear tyre degradation.
HOW HAVE MERCEDES TRIED TO FIX IT?

To solve that rear tyre wear problem, since the Canadian Grand Prix in mid-June Mercedes have removed quite a lot of the downforce-producing devices on the front wing and are never running anywhere near maximum front wing angle.

That reduces the amount of front grip. They've probably lost something like 50-60kg of front downforce so they are running the centre of aerodynamic pressure much further rearward.

The benefit of that is that it will balance the car better so tyre degradation will reduce. But it comes at the cost of a slower overall pace. So the car feels better to drive, but is slower.
WHY WAS HUNGARY SO BAD?
Michael Schumacher looks on in Hungary

Michael Schumacher looks on in Hungary

In the context of all this, it is clear why Hungary was Mercedes's worst circuit so far.

Both Rosberg and Schumacher were complaining of mid-corner understeer there.

There are very few big braking zones at the Hungaroring - most of the corners are preceded by short braking episodes. So the delay in the front wing working at maximum effect has a greater impact.

The driver wants to turn in on the brakes there, but the period of reduced effectiveness of the front wing means he does not have the front grip he needs as he turns into the corner.

In the race, Rosberg was more competitive. That will be because DRS can't be used as much, so the initial understeer isn't as big because the front wing is working more effectively sooner.
HOW CAN MERCEDES SOLVE THE PROBLEM?

Mercedes have a very conventional rear-end aerodynamic treatment and are not trying to exploit the exhaust gases for aerodynamic effect in the way McLaren, Ferrari and Red Bull are.

There is 0.2-0.3 seconds a lap in trying to do that - all produced from greater rear-end grip.

So if Mercedes want to improve, they would be better advised to build that kind of exhaust system. That would give them better rear-end grip, which would enable them to put the front downforce back on without suffering the rear instability they had earlier in the year.

And that would give them more overall downforce and the car would go quicker.

If I was them, I would be thinking very seriously about getting rid of the 'double DRS', unless I was absolutely on top of which circuits it will provide a benefit at and which it will create a deficit.

Hungary was probably the circuit where it will affect them most, because of those short braking zones. The next race is at Spa, where the double DRS will provide some benefits, because there are long straights and some kinks where it will be beneficial to run with the DRS open.

But you have to question, on the evidence of the season so far, whether having it is leading them up a blind alley in terms of their development direction.

Gary Anderson, the former technical director of the Jordan, Stewart and Jaguar teams, is BBC F1's technical analyst

[Alfaster-F1]

[Alfaster-F1]

Fernando Alonso ‏@alo_oficial

“@cafejuanita: @alo_oficial you're a monster and a champion....” Heheehe! I'm a monster Chydovishe !! )