Drivers "developing" a car

[London424]

As per the title...does this happen any more and what/how do they do it?

It seems like so much happens with modelling/simulation and very small amounts of test time that I'm not sure what a driver actually does.

We all hear a driver say things like "no rear grip", or too much oversteer/understeer...but surely there's more to it than that?!

Any help appreciated.

[Halmyre]

http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules_and_regula...

According to 'the rules', you're limited to 15000 test kilometres in a year; that's about the equivalent of 50 full-length races. I suspect that most cars come off the drawing-board (or CAD system) ready-to-go, and if it turns out to be a dog there's little or no time for a test driver to improve on it.

I notice that teams are limited to the amount of computational fluid dynamics work - how on earth can the authorities monitor that with any sort of reliability?

[London424]

Halmyre said:

http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules_and_regula...

According to 'the rules', you're limited to 15000 test kilometres in a year; that's about the equivalent of 50 full-length races. I suspect that most cars come off the drawing-board (or CAD system) ready-to-go, and if it turns out to be a dog there's little or no time for a test driver to improve on it.

I notice that teams are limited to the amount of computational fluid dynamics work - how on earth can the authorities monitor that with any sort of reliability?

Thanks for that...but what I'm wondering is what does the driver actually do in this process?

[andy-xr]

I think it's more giving the real world feedback of what the car's doing in normal conditions, away from labs. Schumacher was supposedly brilliant at it, but went further in terms of suggesting ways to improve it, rather than Hamilton, as an example, who was reported as saying early on at McLaren 'it's not driving too well'

Schumacher on the other hand was reported as saying things such as the wing was too intrusive in certain types of corners, and as a result he was having to drive around an understeer problem. Or something like that.

I think when F1 drivers can get to grips with a car like that, it really brings out the best of the team. And I think this is where someone like Vettel in a Ferrari would come unstuck. Give him a good car and he's amazing, give him a bit of a dog and he's not sure what to do with it.

[maffski]

Halmyre said:

I notice that teams are limited to the amount of computational fluid dynamics work - how on earth can the authorities monitor that with any sort of reliability?

Appendix 8 here http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules_and_regula... suggests it's self reporting by the teams with random inspections and benchmarks.

Can drivers 'develop' the car through the simulator?

[andyps]

andy-xr said:

I think it's more giving the real world feedback of what the car's doing in normal conditions, away from labs. Schumacher was supposedly brilliant at it, but went further in terms of suggesting ways to improve it, rather than Hamilton, as an example, who was reported as saying early on at McLaren 'it's not driving too well'

Schumacher on the other hand was reported as saying things such as the wing was too intrusive in certain types of corners, and as a result he was having to drive around an understeer problem. Or something like that.

I think when F1 drivers can get to grips with a car like that, it really brings out the best of the team. And I think this is where someone like Vettel in a Ferrari would come unstuck. Give him a good car and he's amazing, give him a bit of a dog and he's not sure what to do with it.

I may be wrong but suspect that Hamilton has improved somewhat based on comments made by himself and the team about time spent in the simulator - if he wasn't giving valuable feedback they wouldn't use him for it.

I am sure that drivers do "develop" cars, mainly for their own liking and probably hoping to get an advantage over their team mates that way. Another example is that Hamilton struggled with the brakes in the Mercedes in 2013 so worked with the team to get something which suited him better. I guess anything they suggest which is taken on board could be said to be a developmnet.

[entropy]

andyps said:

I am sure that drivers do "develop" cars, mainly for their own liking and probably hoping to get an advantage over their team mates that way. Another example is that Hamilton struggled with the brakes in the Mercedes in 2013 so worked with the team to get something which suited him better. I guess anything they suggest which is taken on board could be said to be a developmnet.

That's not car development. That's making sure the driver is fully comfortable.

Usually development is based on data gathering, driver feedback should in theory correspond to data; drivers will will have requests how their car responds.

Large bulk of development goes on aero. Looking for more downforce and managing the airflow. A driver will know what a vortice generator is but he won't know where exactly it should be placed on a car. That's why wind tunnels and CFD are a premium.

[upsidedownmark]

Problem is that the car which is theoretically fastest might be completely un-driveable. The driver has to keep the car at the edge of it's performance - on the verge of locking on the brakes, at the optimum tire slip angles for cornering force, and so on. He does that by the seat of his (or her) pants - feel, not by plugging into a USB port.

So, yes, a lot of the car development (especially aero), is done theoretically / in CFD, wind tunnel etc.
However, it isn't the whole story. First you have to be sure that data correlates to the real world; witness back-to-back tests in free practice, flo-vis paint, and a few of ferarri's woes over recent years.

Also, if a driver is confident with the car, that will generate speed - or more accurately if they are not, then they will be slow. Only the driver can give that subjective feedback about how the car feels, and if it works over a wide enough window to be driveable. The quality of the feedback at that stage is going to have a significant effect on how quickly any issues can be rectified.

[andyps]

upsidedownmark said:

Also, if a driver is confident with the car, that will generate speed - or more accurately if they are not, then they will be slow. Only the driver can give that subjective feedback about how the car feels, and if it works over a wide enough window to be driveable. The quality of the feedback at that stage is going to have a significant effect on how quickly any issues can be rectified.

And that pretty much is what I thought - maybe it is about driver comfort or whatever in the car, but if it makes it go quicker on the track in a race the car has been developed. Developed to suit the driver so they have more confidence and go faster.

[skinny]

i've said it before, but the most impressive driver i heard in terms of feedback to the engineers during the winter testing season was Nick Heidfeld.

He was basically an engineer driving the car, and from a few laps could relay information about the downforce, ride height, spring and arb stiffness, diff settings (entry, mid corner, exit), t/c (back in the day), brake balance etc often corner by corner.

other drivers at the time like pizzonia, and montoya, just fed back specific problems rather than suggesting changes.

Rosberg, Vettel, Webber, Kubica were somewhere in between.

I do think the right driver can really help develop a car - but of course they are reliant on their engineer and the rest of the team.

[LDM]

I remember reading that Senna was always keen to see technical printouts so that he could compare it with the feel of the car and was also very good at being able to relay the right information back to the engineers.

[Catatafish]

LDM said:

I remember reading that Senna was always keen to see technical printouts so that he could compare it with the feel of the car and was also very good at being able to relay the right information back to the engineers.

Interesting, he was calibrating his experience/feel to actual measurements.

[covboy]

Many years ago when Derek Ongaro was a Director at Lola Cars we had a factory visit with basically free run of the place. It was at the height of F5000 and amid the many questions about cars and drivers came Derek’s description of a typical Peter Gethin feedback.

After the first few laps of practice, Peter came back into the pits for a de-brief to tell the Team “It feels funny at the back” !!

How would he get on these days I wonder ?