Williams F1

Author
Discussion

tigerkoi

2,927 posts

197 months

Thursday 14th March 2019
quotequote all
Fortitude said:
TheDeuce said:
I'm an engineer, I design and build one off automated displays for large events, TV/films and such. Mostly involving water as a display element.

I just happen to work in between hall & hall (ex BRM guys now selling recon historic cars) and the guy that does all their bodywork repair for them. I first got heavily into F1 when during a chat about cars for TV/film, he told me that between the two of them they had sourced and prepared the cars for the movie Rush. Then a short while later he had 2 of Lauda's cars in the shop, and I was examining the engineering, I fell in love.

So my only relevance really is an engineers mindset. The rest is just seeking knowledge, driven by passion as I'm sandwiched between those two companies smile

We also get more modern stuff here too. No hybrid era just yet but apparently they're virtually impossible to even start without half a geared up F1 team standing by.. so much for their classic race future.
...then we are ALL lucky to have you writing on this message board, for your insightful comments.
Absolutely! Please keep posting and thanks for the response. I had to ask biggrin

This part of the forums is quite a pleasant place to gain some knowledge and contribute on what’s a fairly intricate sport. Lots of really valuable posters seem to group here and I like that the debate is mature. And always more interesting when people a bit closer to the action or people in the sport can also give that insight.



poppopbangbang

1,785 posts

140 months

Thursday 14th March 2019
quotequote all
TheDeuce said:
We also get more modern stuff here too. No hybrid era just yet but apparently they're virtually impossible to even start without half a geared up F1 team standing by.. so much for their classic race future.
To be fair they said that about the V10s when they went FBW everything..... and then we ran them. They said it about the V8s when KERS first appeared.... and then we ran them. There's nothing on the current cars we wouldn't be happy to support so there's nothing stopping us running them too when the time comes.

TheDeuce

21,274 posts

65 months

Thursday 14th March 2019
quotequote all
Fortitude said:
TheDeuce said:
I'm an engineer, I design and build one off automated displays for large events, TV/films and such. Mostly involving water as a display element.

I just happen to work in between hall & hall (ex BRM guys now selling recon historic cars) and the guy that does all their bodywork repair for them. I first got heavily into F1 when during a chat about cars for TV/film, he told me that between the two of them they had sourced and prepared the cars for the movie Rush. Then a short while later he had 2 of Lauda's cars in the shop, and I was examining the engineering, I fell in love.

So my only relevance really is an engineers mindset. The rest is just seeking knowledge, driven by passion as I'm sandwiched between those two companies smile

We also get more modern stuff here too. No hybrid era just yet but apparently they're virtually impossible to even start without half a geared up F1 team standing by.. so much for their classic race future.
...then we are ALL lucky to have you writing on this message board, for your insightful comments.
That's very kind!

To be perfectly honest, my depth of knowledge on the sports history is pretty weak and I'm learning a lot from others on here smile

Very cosy, polite community in this corner of PH I think.

thegreenhell

15,115 posts

218 months

Thursday 14th March 2019
quotequote all
TheDeuce said:
Very cosy, polite community in this corner of PH I think.
Wait until you've read the race threads after the race before you commit to that point of view...

TheDeuce

21,274 posts

65 months

Thursday 14th March 2019
quotequote all
poppopbangbang said:
TheDeuce said:
We also get more modern stuff here too. No hybrid era just yet but apparently they're virtually impossible to even start without half a geared up F1 team standing by.. so much for their classic race future.
To be fair they said that about the V10s when they went FBW everything..... and then we ran them. They said it about the V8s when KERS first appeared.... and then we ran them. There's nothing on the current cars we wouldn't be happy to support so there's nothing stopping us running them too when the time comes.
This is interesting. What is your involvement with the above gen cars if you don't mind my asking? Is your surname Hall!? biggrin (wouldn't even surprise me to be fair)

I was told the issue is twofold, firstly they apparently arrive stripped of software, so you have to almost reverse engineer a solution for that. Secondly, the engines run in such a fragile state they require remote support, fine adjustments to keep them running within safe parameters. I assume the latter is extremely important if you look at them as future running classics, simply to ensure the engine has a usable lifespan sufficient to bother having it run in the first place. I guess what they probably meant is that you simply need more people & kit to make them work reliably, so the exercise becomes impractical perhaps?

Also the issues of working safely with the high amperage, but if you're already running KERS gen PU's then you must be well on top of that.

Anything you can add, I'd love to hear it.

TheDeuce

21,274 posts

65 months

Thursday 14th March 2019
quotequote all
thegreenhell said:
TheDeuce said:
Very cosy, polite community in this corner of PH I think.
Wait until you've read the race threads after the race before you commit to that point of view...
Oh I've seen those too! Nothing wrong with a bit of passion.

Also nothing wrong with being 'wrong' - for those that make outlandish pre-race predictions and then get stuck on their backside trying to defend them after the event biggrin

Given we're on the Williams thread, I will make only one prediction. Williams 2019: Last. I'll take it on the chin if I'm wrong about that one wink

The Moose

22,821 posts

208 months

Thursday 14th March 2019
quotequote all
TheDeuce said:
The Moose said:
I seem to remember somewhere in the Netflix documentary that Sauber couldn’t afford to run their wind tunnel for 2 consecutive years. That being the case and they are now coming back from beyond the back of the grid. I don’t see why Williams can’t turn it around. But I do think Claire is a potential road block that needs to blown through.
They must have used a wind tunnel still. I don't see how it's possible to have a remotely driveable F1 car if not. Can we believe that they just trusted computer modelling and then crossed fingers at pre season testing hoping the downforce would appear at turn one, at 120mph?

In the age of aero over tyres, these cars have no grip at speed at all without downforce. And when all the grip comes from downforce, it has to be almost perfectly balanced to avoid catastrophic oversteer/understeer.

Something is very fishy about the claim they had no wind tunnel testing for two seasons.
Honestly, I have no idea. But I thought it was quite an impressive turn around all things considered.

TheDeuce

21,274 posts

65 months

Thursday 14th March 2019
quotequote all
The Moose said:
TheDeuce said:
The Moose said:
I seem to remember somewhere in the Netflix documentary that Sauber couldn’t afford to run their wind tunnel for 2 consecutive years. That being the case and they are now coming back from beyond the back of the grid. I don’t see why Williams can’t turn it around. But I do think Claire is a potential road block that needs to blown through.
They must have used a wind tunnel still. I don't see how it's possible to have a remotely driveable F1 car if not. Can we believe that they just trusted computer modelling and then crossed fingers at pre season testing hoping the downforce would appear at turn one, at 120mph?

In the age of aero over tyres, these cars have no grip at speed at all without downforce. And when all the grip comes from downforce, it has to be almost perfectly balanced to avoid catastrophic oversteer/understeer.

Something is very fishy about the claim they had no wind tunnel testing for two seasons.
Honestly, I have no idea. But I thought it was quite an impressive turn around all things considered.
Williams could well turn it around. Not this season, but if they identify the core problems and have the capacity to fix them, then they could. And with both Williams now, and your example of Sauber, we will probably never know the the true source of the problems. Just one day, some things will change quite a bit and then a team starts to climb again.

Is the problem Claire? Even she has admitted not knowing the answer to that one (based on which, the answer is; Claire is probably at least some of the problem).. I think it's mostly just an old team whose historically sound wisdom no longer fits in modern F1.

poppopbangbang

1,785 posts

140 months

Thursday 14th March 2019
quotequote all
TheDeuce said:
This is interesting. What is your involvement with the above gen cars if you don't mind my asking? Is your surname Hall!? biggrin (wouldn't even surprise me to be fair)
We run V10 onward F1 cars for a variety of private individuals and organisations. Some in complete original GP spec, some in our own spec, some with our own in house developed powertrains and some a mix of all of that. We also have the odd pre-V10 car but this is mainly to keep some rare and interesting history available rather than any PR or pace reason.

TheDeuce said:
I was told the issue is twofold, firstly they apparently arrive stripped of software, so you have to almost reverse engineer a solution for that. Secondly, the engines run in such a fragile state they require remote support, fine adjustments to keep them running within safe parameters. I assume the latter is extremely important if you look at them as future running classics, simply to ensure the engine has a usable lifespan sufficient to bother having it run in the first place. I guess what they probably meant is that you simply need more people & kit to make them work reliably, so the exercise becomes impractical perhaps?
Some arrived sans electronics, usually if they are acquired as show car that is then built to run. Some arrive complete with associated NDAs etc., usually when a team or someone important to a team would like us to run them. Some are in a grey area where the teams just don't exist any more but the cars do. Either way it's not an issue. It's been spec ECU for years now so the hardware is very available and we write our own code to suit if required (not just on spec ECU either, we still have an MM STEP 6 lab running!)

The engines aren't fragile at all. Neither are the gearboxes once you get past 2004'ish. They're bombproof compared to the old stuff if kept in the operating window and run to accurate life. That life isn't short either. Last of the V10s are good for over 1500KM. Some of the V8s will do 4K KMs with the revs down a touch. On top of that you're dealing with kit that was made in the modern era, with modern production technologies so a lot of it is easily reproducible if required. Generally they'll take damage from other systems failures but these are quite rare and for the most part won't happen if lifes are kept up on. They require man hours in maintenance and prep but if this is done they are very reliable within the original design requirements. You still have the ongoing costs of brakes, NDT and lifed out corner components, castings etc. etc. but at the end of the day they're still F1 cars so that's always going to be the case.

TheDeuce said:
Also the issues of working safely with the high amperage, but if you're already running KERS gen PU's then you must be well on top of that.
All the senior people are ex-F1 so this is no different to the old day job. Same procedures, same safeties, same lifes etc. Just a couple more off car packs to connect before fire up.

TheDeuce

21,274 posts

65 months

Friday 15th March 2019
quotequote all
poppopbangbang said:
The engines aren't fragile at all. Neither are the gearboxes once you get past 2004'ish. They're bombproof compared to the old stuff if kept in the operating window and run to accurate life. That life isn't short either. Last of the V10s are good for over 1500KM. Some of the V8s will do 4K KMs with the revs down a touch. On top of that you're dealing with kit that was made in the modern era, with modern production technologies so a lot of it is easily reproducible if required. Generally they'll take damage from other systems failures but these are quite rare and for the most part won't happen if lifes are kept up on. They require man hours in maintenance and prep but if this is done they are very reliable within the original design requirements. You still have the ongoing costs of brakes, NDT and lifed out corner components, castings etc. etc. but at the end of the day they're still F1 cars so that's always going to be the case.

Thanks for all your responses. specifically the one above about fragility though; I was told (by proxy from an engineer I work with) that the current lower capacity engines are very much on a knife edge, and that they require real time management to run without risking failure. I took that to mean: "they're reliable, so long as the telemetry is watched like a hawk and adjustments made to avoid failure".

When you say you could get them to run, would the above failure scenario simply be avoided by getting them to 'run safe'? Do you ever get the V10/V8 engines to run to that era's typical race pace and have a reliable car for example? And do you think the current hybrid PU's could run reliably at race pace on a set and forget basis, with no remote monitoring?

By reliable I'm talking relative to historic cars, not expecting Honda Civic levels of longevity from any of them.

Edited by TheDeuce on Friday 15th March 00:38

poppopbangbang

1,785 posts

140 months

Friday 15th March 2019
quotequote all
TheDeuce said:
Thanks for all your responses. specifically the one above about fragility though; I was told (by proxy from an engineer I work with) that the current lower capacity engines are very much on a knife edge, and that they require real time management to run without risking failure. I took that to mean: "they're reliable, so long as the telemetry is watched like a hawk and adjustments made to avoid failure".
There's no two way telem in F1 so your only option to command changes to the PU is by radio to the driver and assuming those changes are something that is in software. Generally the strats are to deal with failed sensors and their knock ons but these things aren't going to go pop if someone doesn't bang confirm on the right chassis default within half a second. There is a lot of trick tech on the current engines, like in cylinder pressure monitoring, which has a dual performance/reliability function but beyond asking your man to switch the aux oil tank on or manage temps they do well at looking after themselves...... because there is a huge amount of really smart people with a lot of budget who have that as their aim. If you look at DNFs vs KMs then you can see who nailed it and who had an inherent issue each season - the latter will always be an inherent issue if you are running it in the future but you're likely not going to put it into the regime where that becomes an issue unless absolutely necessary.

TheDeuce said:
When you say you could get them to run, would the above failure scenario simply be avoided by getting them to 'run safe'? Do you ever get the more V10/V8 engines to run to that era's typical race pace and have a reliable car for example? And do you think the current hybrid PU's could run reliably at race pace on a set and forget basis, with no remote monitoring?

By reliable I'm talking relative to historic cars, not expecting Honda Civic levels of longevity from any of them.
Depends on budget, required pace and require KMs. If you're doing tyre testing then you want to simulate cornering forces above accelerative loads for a lot of KMs so you'll run the PU accordingly to maximise life. If you are trying to set a lap record somewhere then you'll do the opposite. The most reliable cars were the last of the none KERS V8s, they are pretty incredible with regards possible KMs on an engine/box. The later KERS V8s were also very tough but with a bit more battery management. Any of them, including the current ones, will be a lot more reliable than a 60's or 70's historic assuming you have the level of resource required to run them to the required standard. Our target is always that we should see reliability in line with what the teams did when they ran the car originally, generally we're above that because, as described above, some of our KMs will be for testing purposes that prioritise life.

TheDeuce

21,274 posts

65 months

Friday 15th March 2019
quotequote all
poppopbangbang said:
TheDeuce said:
Thanks for all your responses. specifically the one above about fragility though; I was told (by proxy from an engineer I work with) that the current lower capacity engines are very much on a knife edge, and that they require real time management to run without risking failure. I took that to mean: "they're reliable, so long as the telemetry is watched like a hawk and adjustments made to avoid failure".
There's no two way telem in F1 so your only option to command changes to the PU is by radio to the driver and assuming those changes are something that is in software. Generally the strats are to deal with failed sensors and their knock ons but these things aren't going to go pop if someone doesn't bang confirm on the right chassis default within half a second. There is a lot of trick tech on the current engines, like in cylinder pressure monitoring, which has a dual performance/reliability function but beyond asking your man to switch the aux oil tank on or manage temps they do well at looking after themselves...... because there is a huge amount of really smart people with a lot of budget who have that as their aim. If you look at DNFs vs KMs then you can see who nailed it and who had an inherent issue each season - the latter will always be an inherent issue if you are running it in the future but you're likely not going to put it into the regime where that becomes an issue unless absolutely necessary.

TheDeuce said:
When you say you could get them to run, would the above failure scenario simply be avoided by getting them to 'run safe'? Do you ever get the more V10/V8 engines to run to that era's typical race pace and have a reliable car for example? And do you think the current hybrid PU's could run reliably at race pace on a set and forget basis, with no remote monitoring?

By reliable I'm talking relative to historic cars, not expecting Honda Civic levels of longevity from any of them.
Depends on budget, required pace and require KMs. If you're doing tyre testing then you want to simulate cornering forces above accelerative loads for a lot of KMs so you'll run the PU accordingly to maximise life. If you are trying to set a lap record somewhere then you'll do the opposite. The most reliable cars were the last of the none KERS V8s, they are pretty incredible with regards possible KMs on an engine/box. The later KERS V8s were also very tough but with a bit more battery management. Any of them, including the current ones, will be a lot more reliable than a 60's or 70's historic assuming you have the level of resource required to run them to the required standard. Our target is always that we should see reliability in line with what the teams did when they ran the car originally, generally we're above that because, as described above, some of our KMs will be for testing purposes that prioritise life.
Thank for all of that input.

I am surprised that as engines have become lower capacity/higher output that they are apparently more reliable than the 60s/70s units. I'm now thinking what I was told was perhaps based upon resource to run the different units, as opposed to potential reliability. I appreciate that if you have the resources, anything can happen.

For purposes of comparison, I know a team of one person can rebuild a 60's engine and it will see the car take part in a historic race.
Could a single person take a current F1 car, rebuild the engine and it manage the same race?
In a like for like restoration and preparation effort, would you get the same reliability from the current vs the historic?

I'll also pick up this debate with my friend. It's a bit tricky to tell him he's wrong, he maintains the engine on his own aeroplane so any suggestion he doesn't know what he's talking about is unlikely to be well received. I can approach it gently though..

NB: To everyone else I'm aware this is now off topic, but also bloody interesting. And in just 24(ish) hours we get to see how Williams do in qualifying, at which point I'm certain the topic will snap back.

TheDeuce

21,274 posts

65 months

Friday 15th March 2019
quotequote all
Watching FP1 Williams so far slowest excluding hulkenberg who has an electrical issue and hasn't left the pits yet.

Russells Williams just stopped at the end of the pit lane and had to be trolleyed back.

It's going well. Specifically as well as predicted.


Edit: finished watching FP1... Too tired for FP2. You'll all see the timings for both when you wake up of course! All I know as of now is that it looks terrible. Even for FP1.

Edited by TheDeuce on Friday 15th March 02:38

Petrus1983

8,521 posts

161 months

Friday 15th March 2019
quotequote all
They’re only 4secs off the pace - nothing to worry about yikes

Teddy Lop

8,294 posts

66 months

Friday 15th March 2019
quotequote all
poppopbangbang said:
All the senior people are ex-F1 so this is no different to the old day job. Same procedures, same safeties, same lifes etc. Just a couple more off car packs to connect before fire up.
that's all really interesting, I was under the impression it was a bit like ex military jets where 50, 100 year old stuff is fairly straightforward for blokes with grease under their fingernails to keep chugging away but the stuff that retired yesterday is so mega complicated and generally worn out too that only insane resources not generally available to enthusiasts will keep it going.

Do you modify the engines much for usability? I'm thinking the incredible tolerance they run too (seized when cold etc)

if you wanted to start a separate thread to post about what you get up to I'm sure I'd be well received.

sgtBerbatov

2,597 posts

80 months

Friday 15th March 2019
quotequote all
Petrus1983 said:
They’re only 4secs off the pace - nothing to worry about yikes
F1: No one could ever put in as poor a show at Australia than Lola F1 did in 1997.

Williams: Hold my beer.

TheDeuce

21,274 posts

65 months

Friday 15th March 2019
quotequote all
Petrus1983 said:
They’re only 4secs off the pace - nothing to worry about yikes
When I posted above to say I was falling asleep after fp1 (not bored, just tired) I just knew FP2 would be the same for them.

4 seconds!? That's comfortably slower than last year at Melbourne.

I'm not really surprised, the writing was on the wall. I was a bit shocked at how far off though, 2 seconds off p18 is huge.

sgtBerbatov

2,597 posts

80 months

Friday 15th March 2019
quotequote all
Even Minardi, in the bad times, would get closer to P18 than that. Jesus they'd even be in P18!

Petrus1983

8,521 posts

161 months

Friday 15th March 2019
quotequote all
sgtBerbatov said:
F1: No one could ever put in as poor a show at Australia than Lola F1 did in 1997.

Williams: Hold my beer.
Brilliant biglaugh

WestyCarl

3,217 posts

124 months

Friday 15th March 2019
quotequote all
If this is representative then they will remain at the back for the whole season cry

I wonder how long they can remain independent with this sort of performance.