Very interesting article from the Judge on the engines: #F1 Forensics: ERS and Software â A new Pandoraâs Box Taking just a snippet of the piece: Mercedes PU106 : Less power but more performance After the Australian GP rumours begun to circulate about what could have been the secret of so much performance and reliability on the Mercedes power unit. Reliable sources have indicated that the simplified design of the power unit may hold the advantage to the Mercedes PU106. According to these rumours, Mercedes have chosen to give up some of the power of the ERS to have more reliability and a continuous and constant flow of energy. What is it about? Well, at Brixworth, engineers chose to renounce a part of the energy by reducing battery pack storage capacity (2MJ instead of 4MJ) , the advantages of this would be many. First of all â a much lighter battery pack- around 12/13Kg instead of the 25Kg the competition are running with. The reduced amount of energy translates also into lower cooling needs and in a more clearly defined package. The reduced weight is a major advantage, which is also reflected in fuel consumption without even mentioning that less stress would be put on the power unit by the reduced loads. In short, simplify to get more performance. This approach is completely different from its competitors, which could help Mercedes score many points while other teams are still suffering with the reliability of their systems. It is this reliability that seemed totally lacking for Red Bull yet the Austrian team in collaboration with the transalpine engine manufacturer impressed many people in Australia. Putting aside the controversy about the flow meter, the French giant who has been accused of not being capable to supply a good power unit during the pre-season testing has successfully managed to sort out most of the problems proving once again that the software that has the task to manage the ERS is as important as the mechanical part. Indeed it seems that the problems Red Bull suffered, and are still struggling with, are related to bad software management of the energy stored in the battery pack, which lead to overheating â first of the wiring and then of the two electric motors (mainly the MGU-K) Just the two electric motors (MGU-K and MGU-H) seem to be the reasons behind Ferrari F14-T lack of speed. The Prancing Horse has displayed an apparent lack of speed since pre-season testing and this situation has repeatedly manifested itself during the inaugural GP of the season. During the qualifying session, Ferrari (both with Kimi and Fernando) was unable to do two consecutive laps with the ERS deploying its full power; unlike its opponent. This situation results not only in slower lap times, but also with higher fuel consumption (because of less usable power from the ERS). This forced the drivers to significantly reduce their race pace. The problem seems to lie in the âcommunicationâ between the two electric motors and the battery pack, a problem that also affects the brake-by-wire. Amongst the top teams, the F14-T was the only one that never activated â during the race â the automatic fuel saving function, which is identified by the flashing red rear light. This accounts â more than the alleged heavier weight of the 059/3 â for the high fuel consumption and the lack of performance shown by Raikkonen and Alonso. It is evident, therefore, that the software will be the key on which teams will focus most of their efforts. The new hybrid systems have opened new scenarios and different ideas for interpretation but all with one purpose: to recover energy in a more efficient way. Which one will be the best? We are still in the early stages to be able to answer this question. Mercedesâ solution could be the one, which could give more guarantees for the first part of the season, but what will happen when Renault and Ferrari fix their issues? Will it be enough for Mercedes powered cars to run (if rumours are confirmed) with less power but for a longer time? Itâs time to get excited over new F1 technology, rather than distracted by ânoiseâ.
Too be honest I've not attended a GP for the last 5 years, having not liked the tyre bollocks, DRS and the like, despite not missing any British GP since 69, for me it's all santitised and sadly I've really lost some interest, much prefer the historic races, where you can still get into the pit garages and stand beside a V8 Cosworth being fired up. As for Jenson Button, who's he !!!!!
To be fair, Jenson was making the point that what matters is that the racing still happens regardless of the noise. The competitive challenge of the sport (the best drivers in the world competing against each other) remains the same and thus the calibre of racing is as good as it can be. One could always take that comment in isolation and argue that you may as well race carts then so long as it's the best drivers. But I think it's obvious that all Jenson is getting at is that it's the same for everyone so they just need to get on with it. His comments are also quite clearly aimed at other drivers and at no point does he say that fans should do the same and "leave if they don't like it" so I don't think it's as inflammatory a comment as some would like to make out.
SOFTWARE, don't get start me on this, I'm in automation and trying to get software Herberts to understand what I actually need instead of what they think I need is a bloody nightmare.
Tobias Grüner F1 ‏@tgruener 1h Lauda hits out against critics. "If Vettel was driving a Merc and had won in Melbourne, he wouldn't say cars are too slow and too quiet." Tobias Grüner F1 ‏@tgruener 1h Marko replied: "Niki only likes the new sound, because his cars are winning." Full story (in German) AMuS: http://ams.to/qo Oh you guys
Give them a decent set of user requirements and if the requirements are written correctly (i.e. what you need accomplishing) the software engineers should provide a solution. User requirements are difficult to write but they should not say how the solution is achieved just what needs to be done. Good luck. PS. a good set of user requirements are a great tool to beat up the software engineers when it comes to signing off their solution.
Totally agree, problem is "interpretation" as you know {absolute specifics} are almost impossible to achieve and get easily lost in translation especially when dealing with foreign suppliers.
Generally the requirements change a dozen times on the poor devepers, followed by a mile of scope creep and a total disregard for any sound advice. Usually resulting in a bloated, inefficient product, produced to a ridiculous deadline .. For which the development team takes the flack.
Yes, this is possible its true, but I have just completed a major £5.5 million project with UK, Italian, French, Belgian, German and British suppliers and contractors finished on time, within budget and running at 82% eff 24 hr running within 6 weeks of commissioning, you absolutely must be clear and hard on objectives and specification, the pre delivery trials all failed on performance despite the specification being very clear, and all equipment was rejected, one supplier the French, said OK dont accept the equipment we will sell it to someone else, "Go ahead" was our response and "we will ruin" your reputation, he responded appropriately, all the other suppliers responded professionally and within timescales performed to spec. You just need to get tough Bhaji
Must admit Bhaji its sounds easier than it actually was mate, The Germans were particularly tough to deal with, they did not appreciate the initial criticisms, but they responded in the most professional manner and ultimately exceeded expectation by far. The Belgians were very easy to work with and were the most pro British, the beer was also good.
Never been a fan of Porsche for some reason, just got myself an Impreza, for fun, should know better at my age eh. Bollocks, you only live once mate !!
More on the engines, from someone who's knows something (not Crofty) - http://somersf1.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/comparing-powerunits-understanding.html?m=1
ah, software, all I will say on the matter is once I saw mini tsunami caused by an earthquake in tunisia, the wave cam across the town bringing the cars with it, when everything had settled all the people with new cars were ****ed.
Lol, but I'm fairly sure anything with a combustion engine is somewhat allergic to water. New cars are just designed to be unfixable without a laptop and plastic. How can you cover an engine in so much plastic. 9 pieces only there for show to get to some glow plugs once.
See I told you Sky Sports led me a stray with their BS knowledge of the rules making out the Mercedes only have that turbo set up.
I get ****ed by software and associated safety circuits every day Miggs, and there,s no water in sight, almost impossible to reset some of these systems.
