2019 Mercedes AMG Petronas Formula One Team

[Big Tea]

How much does the heat of the track affect the actual tyre to surface traction? Merc run higher downforce (which costs power) so would they need even more with the softer contact patch?
Also, am I right in believing air that goes for extra cooling is not doing its downforce job properly?

[digitalrurouni]

Sounds like Mexico is another track thats gonna result in a painful weekend for the Mercedes.

[zibby43]

How much does the heat of the track affect the actual tyre to surface traction? Merc run higher downforce (which costs power) so would they need even more with the softer contact patch?
Also, am I right in believing air that goes for extra cooling is not doing its downforce job properly?

The softer the rubber, the better the grip, which is why the softest compounds are used in qualifying and in Q3 for the top teams. The hotter the track, the softer the rubber.

The more downforce you have, the better you look after the tires, as you're creating a consistent, predictable contact patch with the track surface. With less downforce, the car slides around and overheats the surface of the tire tread, which causes lack of grip and other tire-related problems.

Merc didn't have any tire woes this weekend. They had overheating woes. Which takes us to your next question.

When you open up bodywork like this, you are disrupting the clean aerodynamic surfaces of the car. All of the flow structures and powerful vortices that would normally be barreling over smooth bodywork and being sucked down into the floor and diffuser are suddenly jolted and detached by these jagged surfaces that are creating their own structures.

The more you open up the bodywork, the more inefficient (i.e., draggier) you make the car.



Kind of quick and dirty answers to very technical questions, but I hope that made some sense.

[erudite450]

Merc didn't have any tire woes this weekend. They had overheating woes. Which takes us to your next question.

It was frustrating to hear the Sky F1 commentators/pundits (Paul Di Resta and Damon Hill in particular), constantly misleading the audience with talk of Mercedes tyre issues. People just get stuck in the supposed trait of a particular car as opposed to the present characteristics. Mercedes has the best tyre wear on the grid at the moment.

[SiLo]

You could tell as well. Once everyone pit and then Hamilton was left at the front he smashes the fastest lap up to that point by half a second and was instantly told to calm down as the car was already overheating. I think they absolutely had the pace to compete had there not been a heat wave this week.

[GPR-A]

Merc didn't have any tire woes this weekend. They had overheating woes. Which takes us to your next question.

It was frustrating to hear the Sky F1 commentators/pundits (Paul Di Resta and Damon Hill in particular), constantly misleading the audience with talk of Mercedes tyre issues. People just get stuck in the supposed trait of a particular car as opposed to the present characteristics. Mercedes has the best tyre wear on the grid at the moment.

They simply got the the cooling requirements calculation wrong for this race and reacted in the best possible way to mitigate a major problem (although wasn't enough). They had this issue with Lewis' car in Russia 2017 and he was just nowhere in that race too. I don't think they have a PU cooling issue per se, but just about how you package the car based on the simulations. In the hindsight you can say, if they would have known the temperatures in Spielberg in advance, they would have come prepared well and it would have been a different story.

Their race pace was weaker than their FP2 pace suggested. They probably ran more conservative in race than in FP2! We will never know the answer for sure, but that is what the lap times say.

[Edit]At the time of writing the above post, I hadn't read this article. But seems like I had good guess.

Link -> Bottas says miscalculation led to cooling issues in Austria

"We knew today was going to be hot, but we calculated it a tiny bit wrong as well," Bottas said.

"I think also the laptime estimates for the lift and coast was not quite spot on. The more we had to do lift and coast, we were losing bigger chunks of time than we actually predicted.

"For me it was the hardest race in terms of power unit management, temperature management, I've never had to manage it so much.

"Also we couldn't run the full power of the engine, because of temperatures, so that was costing quite a bit of laptime as well.

"So it was tricky, attacking and defending was pretty much impossible, and always if there was a car close ahead I was getting brighter, bigger warnings on the dash.

[zibby43]

Merc didn't have any tire woes this weekend. They had overheating woes. Which takes us to your next question.

It was frustrating to hear the Sky F1 commentators/pundits (Paul Di Resta and Damon Hill in particular), constantly misleading the audience with talk of Mercedes tyre issues. People just get stuck in the supposed trait of a particular car as opposed to the present characteristics. Mercedes has the best tyre wear on the grid at the moment.

Totally agree and well said. That was some of the laziest commentating I've ever seen.

[Big Tea]

How much does the heat of the track affect the actual tyre to surface traction? Merc run higher downforce (which costs power) so would they need even more with the softer contact patch?
Also, am I right in believing air that goes for extra cooling is not doing its downforce job properly?

The softer the rubber, the better the grip, which is why the softest compounds are used in qualifying and in Q3 for the top teams. The hotter the track, the softer the rubber.

The more downforce you have, the better you look after the tires, as you're creating a consistent, predictable contact patch with the track surface. With less downforce, the car slides around and overheats the surface of the tire tread, which causes lack of grip and other tire-related problems.

Merc didn't have any tire woes this weekend. They had overheating woes. Which takes us to your next question.

When you open up bodywork like this, you are disrupting the clean aerodynamic surfaces of the car. All of the flow structures and powerful vortices that would normally be barreling over smooth bodywork and being sucked down into the floor and diffuser are suddenly jolted and detached by these jagged surfaces that are creating their own structures.

The more you open up the bodywork, the more inefficient (i.e., draggier) you make the car.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D-FaJOJXUAAKOXh.jpg

Kind of quick and dirty answers to very technical questions, but I hope that made some sense.

Thanks zibby43

I knew softer was more grippy, but wondered if there came a time (or temp) when it was too much of a good thing.
Like with a pencil eraser, which is softer the better until it just flakes.

I appreciate the reply

[zibby43]

How much does the heat of the track affect the actual tyre to surface traction? Merc run higher downforce (which costs power) so would they need even more with the softer contact patch?
Also, am I right in believing air that goes for extra cooling is not doing its downforce job properly?

The softer the rubber, the better the grip, which is why the softest compounds are used in qualifying and in Q3 for the top teams. The hotter the track, the softer the rubber.

The more downforce you have, the better you look after the tires, as you're creating a consistent, predictable contact patch with the track surface. With less downforce, the car slides around and overheats the surface of the tire tread, which causes lack of grip and other tire-related problems.

Merc didn't have any tire woes this weekend. They had overheating woes. Which takes us to your next question.

When you open up bodywork like this, you are disrupting the clean aerodynamic surfaces of the car. All of the flow structures and powerful vortices that would normally be barreling over smooth bodywork and being sucked down into the floor and diffuser are suddenly jolted and detached by these jagged surfaces that are creating their own structures.

The more you open up the bodywork, the more inefficient (i.e., draggier) you make the car.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D-FaJOJXUAAKOXh.jpg

Kind of quick and dirty answers to very technical questions, but I hope that made some sense.

Thanks zibby43

I knew softer was more grippy, but wondered if there came a time (or temp) when it was too much of a good thing.
Like with a pencil eraser, which is softer the better until it just flakes.

I appreciate the reply

You're very welcome! Your question was a good one, and now that I understand the specific point you're inquiring about a bit better, I can give you a more narrowly tailored answer.

Higher temperatures can definitely create some problems with the tires (particularly the soft compounds). These cars put a tremendous amount of energy into the tires at some circuits with the various latitudinal and longitudinal loads from high-speed cornering and heavy braking after long straights.

These forces are putting a lot of heat into the surface of the tread itself, whereas the inner tread/carcass of the tire is being heated up by the glowing-hot rotors. As I alluded to above, so long as you are maintaining sufficient heat in both parts of the tire, you're going to get the short-term grip you need to avoid sliding around on the tires.

The higher ambient/track temperatures basically narrow the window to achieve this objective. If the car is sliding around too much because it is lacking downforce or mechanical grip, you're going to overheat the surface of the tread and the hot track surface will just potentiate the effect.

If the tires become too soft and grippy for the conditions or the driver has overworked the tires before getting them up to a working temperature, you can get graining (which we saw on the Soft compound this weekend in the FP sessions).

[Big Tea]

thanks, appreciated.

[astracrazy]

Merc didn't have any tire woes this weekend. They had overheating woes. Which takes us to your next question.

It was frustrating to hear the Sky F1 commentators/pundits (Paul Di Resta and Damon Hill in particular), constantly misleading the audience with talk of Mercedes tyre issues. People just get stuck in the supposed trait of a particular car as opposed to the present characteristics. Mercedes has the best tyre wear on the grid at the moment.

Totally agree and well said. That was some of the laziest commentating I've ever seen.

Croft has always made up his own narrative or made constant mistakes. Back in his 5live radio days there were two races. The one that was actually happening and the one people were listening to being commentated by Croft.

[dans79]

So Mercedes issue is the radiators are to small!

[Juzh]

1) Opening up the bodywork negates half a second worth of their aerodynamic performance relative to the other top teams;

But why? It's not like other teams don't do this as well, everyone had their cars opened up moreso than usual, just not to the extent mercedes had to do in this particular race. I don't think bodywork alone was worth 0,5s. It's also funny how the deficit keeps getting bigger as days go by, started with 0.5s, went up to 0,6s , now we talking about 0,7s already??

[Juzh]

So Mercedes issue is the radiators are to small!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Fhud_XwT1Q

Well, as expected, it was a concious decision by the design team to sacrifice cooling performance for aero benefits. So far no one can say this approach doesn't work, as it clearly seems the way to go, at least this year. Throw away a race here or there and dominate the rest.

[zibby43]

1) Opening up the bodywork negates half a second worth of their aerodynamic performance relative to the other top teams;

But why? It's not like other teams don't do this as well, everyone had their cars opened up moreso than usual, just not to the extent mercedes had to do in this particular race. I don't think bodywork alone was worth 0,5s. It's also funny how the deficit keeps getting bigger as days go by, started with 0.5s, went up to 0,6s , now we talking about 0,7s already??

"The Mercedes is packaged so tightly at the rear that in this heatwave, at this altitude, its bodywork needed to be opened up significantly more than that of either Ferrari or Red Bull. The extra area of radiator outlet peeking above the suspension at the base of the engine cover was visibly greater on the Mercedes than its rivals. This not only interrupts an aerodynamically sensitive area around the diffuser, but that hotter air is less dense, thereby less effective in creating the pressure differentials that in turn create downforce."

"So the Mercedes’ usual downforce advantage was reduced, possibly even cancelled out. And even though the lap time cost of the car’s extra drag over the Ferrari was reduced by the high altitude, that altitude took more of Mercedes’ lap time (relative to Ferrari) than it gave."

In terms of the total time lost, you have time lost from Merc's aero advantage being cancelled out (which was the largest chunk, according to multiple sources), and then additional time lost in the race from Mercedes having to turn down the PU and use more conservative engine modes. Not to mention all the time lost from having to lift and coast. That's why the lap time lost delta is growing, as more information becomes available.

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/repo ... ace-report