Grand Prix thread Italian Grand Prix 2015

Theres not much the FIA can do given the rules they vaguely set were followed to the letter. The tyres were filled to 19.5psi at 110c (overseen by Pirelli). I'm sure the volumes do change within the tyre but considering the downforce and lateral forces these tyres feel at speed, not to forget the forces of simply being spun, I can't see them getting saggy at rest. Testing the tyres with the car on jacks/on the tarmac is likely to have some volume/pressure effect as well. The FIA need to set a clear cut rule for what situation the tyre needs to be at 19.5psi for, otherwise you'll have petty teams complaining that the tyres of their competitors are 19.4psi when testing in the walk in freezer.

 

Spot on!

 

If it had been any other team than the one that spent days in secret tyre tests I would have put it down to a mistake, but because, once again, it's Whiting, Pirelli and Mercedes that are involved in possible shenanigans.

Every team will push to (and past) the limits of the law, with middle finger raised to the spirit, but the problems all seem to stem from the decisions of one man.
I want Whiting removed and replaced by someone upto the job.

 

It's a pointless debate anyway... because that .3psi wouldn't have given Merc anywhere near the 25+ second thrashing they dealt out.

I'd think it was more likely that the FIA were fishing to see if they could find something to strip the win from Merc so that the end of the season doesn't turn out to be as monumentally dull as the rest of it has been.

 

People focus on the minor difference but its irrelevant - this is not debatable - its either compliant or non compliant. It is irrelevant whether there is even an advantage, there are many areas in motorsport where parts etc my be deemed non compliant but offer no performance advantage - its still illegal. However, what I find interesting is that most seem to focus on Lewis being 0.3psi under and not Nico's 1.1psi - that all of a sudden goes from being a minor infringement to a significant infringement.

The alleged reasons for the tyre pressure monitoring was for safety, in which case what does it matter if there is any performance gain? Anyway for what its worth we all seem to agree that the rules did not allow this issue to be policed correctly and that is where the fault lies.

 

Looking at it in that light you're absolutely right. And if we are to believe what Merc said (they filled the tyres correctly and just removed the blankets earlier than other cars, we could assume both Lewis and Nico's blankets were removed at the same time) then by the time the race started Lewis' tyre pressure, like Nico's would have been under by 1.1 or more. The only reason we saw how much lower Nico's was, was due to how long it took to get from Lewis' car to Nico's. The issue isn't the tyre pressure as Merc were able to prove it was correct when Pirelli approved it. The issue is when the FIA checked it and that is why the FIA were unable to pin this on Merc and are now saying they will notify exactly when the checks will be made.

 

I don't think there is any doubt that Merc inflated the tyres correctly under Pirelli's supervision - which is likely why there was no further action. Merc seemed to comply with the rules to the letter of the law - whether that's because the rules were useless or that Merc (and probably others) used them to their advantage - is another debate. The rules were simply not diligent enough to police or take action.

This is the key point for me:


I suppose the question is, when did everyone else take theirs off?

"And at significantly different temperatures from others cars"

 

Exactly. Any other team would've been fisted of that I'm sure. Red Bull were running their car legally in Australia last year but Ricciardo was still DSQ'd. Sauber were disqualified in Australia a few years before that for having a rear wing element which was a couple of mm too large. The FIA aren't in a position to judge whether an infringement brings an advantage or not, if the sport worked like that everyone would turn up with an illegal car and explain after the race how the illegalities weren't bringing an advantage.

The word of the Pirelli engineer is meaningless too. What's he going to say? "I supervised them running the car illegally, and let them go to the grid with it anyway against all the recommendations of my employer". Of course he's going to say it was all by the book, he'd be sacked if he said anything else. I've no doubt it was a genuine mistake, or that Mercedes didn't gain an advantage, or nor were they looking to gain one, but they were careless. Ferrari's tyres were found to be above the minimum pressure, clearly they'd given themselves some leeway to ensure compliance and Ferrari have probably lost performance because of this.

These rules were introduced because the FIA suspected teams were ensuring their tyres were legal when they left the garage, but then able to run below the minimum tyre pressure out on track. The spot tests were designed to help ensure the tyres ran under safe conditions at all times. Mercedes knew this, and they were careless in allowing their tyres to drop to an illegal state on the grid.

 

25 seconds is the time lost in a pit stop for worn out tyres.

 

But they wouldn't be making an extra pit stop for worn out tyres. They would still make the same amount of pit stops just maybe for a lap or two loose a few tenths extra. So maybe the gap would be 20 seconds instead of 25 and that's being generous.

 

30 mins of onboards form the GP

 

How can so many people be so ignorant of a basic law of physics?

 

Were they not found to be compliant though?

As for Nico... I don't think anybody is focusing on him in particular because you could give him every advantage under the sun and he'd still likely find a way to make a complete balls of it. I'm not trying to be mean to the bloke, but he's really not offering anything that remotely looks like a challenge. He's almost becoming invisible.

As for the safery side of it, I'm completely baffled as to why Pirelli would test pressures, have concerns over it and then it only be investigated towards the end of the race. If this is a safety measure, no car should be allowed on the grid if there are any concerns. How would it look if there was an injury due to teams not following the the rules and the manufacturer knew before it even set off?

To me, it seems as though the FIA might have been looking for a way to DQ Merc, simply because it's another absolutely dull season. If that's the case, (not saying it is) in all honesty I can't blame them since the last three seasons in a row have been about as exciting as a lettuce sandwich.

 

I'm curious, what part of physics are we all ignorant of!

 

The race directive relative to the rule relating to the tyre manufacture was that the minimum pressure was required at no less than 19.5psi and as confirmed by Pirelli Merc were considerably lower than all others. Obviously the debate is where the responsibility to the pressure ended and the physics of how they could be below the minimum allowed.

The fact that they were below the figure would mean that they weren't compliant, the fact that the rules of policing it and the means and manner in which it was detected were arguable means it wasn't enforceable. It reminds me of flex wings and active ride height - policing a changeable target that differs in differing situations has to be clear, concise and water tight. I remember teams arguing their minimum weight was affected by the temperature of the fuel and associated volume - the rule was a minimum - it's the teams job to calculate the variable not use it as a default justication.

Even if it was a witch hunt (which is quite possible), it doesn't detract from the fact that teams are circumnavigating the rule - legal or not!

 

Oh.... I'm certainly not suggesting it's a witch hunt, but with the the absolutely dire state of the racing, I can certainly get why they might look to try find something to level the points a bit. We've basically watched 3 years of absolutely dross, which really isn't good at all.

Going back to the safety aspect... I still don't get why Pirelli would risk a car take the grid knowing it was potentially dangerous, especially when they are trying to defend their own image and reputation, and nor why Merc would try risk a tyre failure when they have so much in their pocket. It just wouldn't add up to me.

 

The temperature of a liquid shouldn't affect it's mass? Perhaps you're talking about it's density, which is why teams are allowed 100kg rather than 100litres (or more like 75litres in this case). A team could have 'more' fuel if they filled with cold fuel using litres as a measurement, but mass is mass, hot or cold you get the same amount.

Here the FIA set a minimum limit which Mercedes complied with. In retrospect they should have set a pressure limit at a set temperature but they didn't. Mercedes filled the tyres to 19.5psi at 110c (allowed blanket temp) and so complied with the rules. The FIA simply didn't have a leg to stand on, Mercedes followed the rules.

I'm not even sure it can be called clever like the flexing wings of Bulls. They passed the flex tests and so were legal, despite the visual evidence in the race. To me this is clever engineering and I applauded it, it was F1 showing it's clever side. This was just the FIA kicking up a fuss over nothing. The PSI limits had been 18.5psi which up to now had used the same method as Mercedes employed, Pirelli checking them as they were filled in the blankets in the garage. The only thing that changed was the FIA checking on the grid, checking something they didn't have a rule for. It was the FIA being the opposite of clever....

 

For me this is the crucial point. Mercedes couldn't prove this because they allowed the tyre temperatures to cool to such an extent their pressures were no longer legal. You can't just say "We know they're below the minimum pressure now, but trust us, at 110c they'll be legal again", everyone will say that. It's like Sauber saying their rear wing infringement brought no performance advantage, what are they going to say "yeah we did it because it's worth a couple of tenths"?

 

They had pirellis watchful eye as proof. It's what every team does, both with the 18.5 and 19.5 limits. They had no advantage since it's the same for all.

 

Just going to copy and paste what I said earlier: The word of the Pirelli engineer is meaningless too. What's he going to say? "I supervised them running the car illegally, and let them go to the grid with it anyway against all the recommendations of my employer". Of course he's going to say it was all by the book, he'd be sacked if he said anything else.

Only an FIA technical delegate can declare a car legal, not some random bloke from Pirelli.