The Technology Behind Formula One

axlrosen writes "An article in the NY Times about the technology behind Formula One. The wealthiest teams arm themselves with powerful advantages, almost entirely centering on computing controls in the cars and computer simulation in design. Car data is sent in multi-megabyte wireless bursts each time the team's cars flash past the pits, often in excess of 200 miles an hour. It is simultaneously sent over the Internet to a larger data center in Maranello, Italy, where more complex analysis is done. AMD is expected to supply a supercomputer roughly as fast as the world's 10th most powerful machine to the Swiss-based Sauber Petronas racing team... I love the crazy steering wheel - anyone know what all those buttons and knobs do?"

Re:The New Direction In Sports

[no reason to be here]

It's hitting all sports. Spend to win and use money and technology to remove so much doubt the mystery of the game is ultimately solved.

Doesn't always work in all sports. In baseball, for example, the Yankees, who spend the most of any team, have remained competetive, but are not guaranteed a Championship, as the last few years have shown. In fact, the World Series winners the past few years have all been mid-market teams (2003 Marlins, 2002 Angels, 2001 Diamondbacks). Conversely, the Mets, who spend the 2nd most in baseball, have been in the cellar for the last few seasons. Same for the Rangers, who also boast a fairly high rate of team spending.

Technology is killing F1

[Timesprout]

I think they should remove most of the technology to level the playing field for the smaller teams. F1 should be a bit more in the spirit of man and machine racing each other, not man determines direction computer controlled racing machine is pointing in.

Re:For the American audience

[NetJunkie]

I like F1, and Le Mans, but the problem most Americans face is that the races are on at like 3AM. I sometimes catch a race real late or maybe watch one on tape delay, but it just isn't the same as Live.

Re:The New Direction In Sports

[kmankmankman2001]

Ferrari isn't winning because they have the most money. BMW-Williams, Toyota, Ford (Jaguar-Cosworth), etc. aren't exactly collecting foodstamps you know.

Ferrari is winning because they have assembled a fantastic team. From the engineering talent that designed the car to the logistic support to the pit crew and, of course, one of the greatest drivers in the history of the sport - Michael Schumaker.

I'm also trying to remember who won the World Series last year. The Yankees, right, cause they have the biggest payroll? Ooops, no, it was the Florida Marlins with a payroll at the other end of the spectrum.

Analogies are great except when they don't hold up.

Re:The buttons do a lot of stuff

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, the drivers have to put the steering wheel back on so that the car can be moved by the track crew. The drivers/teams will get fined if they do not do so.

What Technology?

[Viceice]

Everytime some engineer dreams up a killer piece of technology, it gets banned. Figured out an effective shape that generates downforce? Get banned. Figure out how to recofigure ur car on the fly? Get banned.

And what about traction control? Adaptive suspension? not to mention 1001 other things that make a car go faster and safer, and turn better.

I hate it the way they keep banning technology. It used to be that F1 was the pinnicle of automative technology. Not anymore. Now you can buy a road car with more technology in it then an F1 car.

Sheesh.

Playing by 'team rules' is the problem

[Animaether]

Just my opinion, for the most part (based on facts, sadly)...

He does play by team rules, that's partly the problem.

Who doesn't remember Barricello being in #1 position in front of M. Schumacher on #2 being ordered by the Ferrari team to let M. Schumacher win ?
Those kinds of tactics are exactly what are hurting Formula 1 as a whole, and not just the Ferrari/M. Schumacher image.

Mind you, any team M. Schumacher has been in has also always been cutting-edge to the point of risking safety. This ranges from cars being sprayed with fuel in the pit lane due to cutting corners to make tanking faster to crewmen getting hurt by driving into them.

Not taking away that M. Schumacher is a great driver, mind you, but so were Aeyrton Senna and Nigel Mansell - but those loved the sport. M. Schumacher, I'm afraid, tends to love mostly himself and will do anything to further his image.

Re:Super Speedway...

[JonTurner]

>>a total stop from 200mph in 1.6 seconds. Imagine the g-forces. ...not to mention the heat! 1000C+ is typical after braking at the end of a straight, with normal operating temperature between 400-800 degrees Celsius!

More info from http://www.f1technical.net/article2.html : "A mere 4 seconds is the amount of time it takes for a Formula One car to go from 300km/h to a complete halt. At 200 km/h, a Formula One contender requires just 2.9 seconds to stop completely, a process that will have been accomplished over 65 meters. At 100km/h, these values are just as mind-blowing: 1.4 seconds and 17 meters! Under these heavy braking periods, a driver is subjected to a horizontal deceleration of close to 5,2G."

and...

"These brakes are extremely expensive as they are made from hi-tech carbon materials (long chain carbon, as in carbon fibre) and they can take up to 5 months to produce a single brake disk. The first stage in making a disc is to heat white polyacrylo nitrile (PAN) fibres until they turn black. This makes them pre-oxidised, and are arranged in layers similar to felt. They are then cut into shape and carbonised to obtain very pure carbon fibres. Next, they undergo two densification heat cycles at around 1000 degrees Celsius. These stages last hundreds of hours, during which a hydrocarbon-rich gas in injected into the oven or furnace. This helps the layers of felt-like material to fuse together and form a solid material. The finished disc is then machined to size ready for installing onto the car."

"There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing and mountaineering; all the rest are merely games." - Ernest Hemingway.

Re:The New Direction In Sports

[asoap]

This is the old argument of "how fast do you want to go?" "How much money do you have?".

The real question you should be asking is. How do you stop it? Nascar seems like the one organization that tries to make everything equal. But it totally fails. The same rule applies. Whoever has the most money has the best shot at winning. In Nascar all of the cars are the same. The exact same bodies, and most of the settings are the same. The only difference is the motors, but those are more similar than different. They use technology that went out of the style in the mid 70's mixed with modern technology. For what? It's still not even. The team with the most money will have the best driver. The team with the most money will hire the best mechanics to setup the car the best.

So if it's not even in the first place, then why try to make all the cars even also? That is how you get F1.

-asoap

Button use

[stinkydog]

Which button controls Internet Explorer?
Nothing like a little in-race pr0n to get the motor running.

It seems like some buttons are missing. Proposed new controls:
DOS
EMP
NOS

SD

Re:it will take a supercomputer...

[jocknerd]

But give me F1 anyday over Nascar.

Amen to that. I'm in the heart of NASCAR country. I just don't see what it has to offer. Carburated engines. Tauruses. Give me a break. I put NASCAR on the same level as Pro Wrestling.

Re:Playing by 'team rules' is the problem

[gowen]

Those kinds of tactics are exactly what are hurting Formula 1 as a whole, and not just the Ferrari/M. Schumacher image.

No, whats hurting F1 is, on the majority of courses, its almost impossible to overtake, which means that its almost never maneuvers that win races, but consistent speed and a good pit stop strategy.

Schumi's great, but even he uses the pit stops to actually overtake (on the rare occasions when he's not on pole).

Re:Playing by 'team rules' is the problem

[GPLDAN]

I advocate a one-fuel tank strategy for F1, even if you cut the laps in the race from 70 to 50. No pitting, pit stops don't exist. 3 Hour long qualifying sessions, teams can only draw one session, draw is random, best lap counts - you can come in as many times as you want during qualifying. But the tires and fuel have to last the whole race. There would be huge changes in the cars, but they are already talking about mandating V8s. I think it would make the sport great again.

Re:Playing by 'team rules' is the problem

[Blofeld]

I would agree with both points, and add another, regulations. Current regs are allowing for insane amounts of downforce, and little in the way of mechanical grip.

I was reading that at the USGP, cars hit around 200 mph at the end of the long front straight. To make the next turn, the cars need to brake to around 70 mph. They start braking at the 50 meter mark! With such rapid deceleration (possible due to the amount of downforce at high speed), there is a very slim margin of error, thus overtaking is indeed difficult.

It has been said by many that to increase passing, put emphasis back on mechanical grip so that drivers can do things like overtake around the outside of a turn, which is almost unheard of today.

Re:Brake Balance

[GPLDAN]

If it were like the 1960s, this year would have seen the death of Jensen Button, JPM, and Jarno Trulli. Oh yeah, and Michael would eventually perish as well. It took Jimmy Clark dying and Jackie Stewart saying "this is bullshit, enough is enough" to get safety pushed up.

The late 60's and early 70's, esp Jackie's drive at the Nordschliefe, were insanely great. But if you ask Dan Gurney, nothing was worth the price paid.

Re:Playing by 'team rules' is the problem

[homer_ca]

That's true. With evenly matched cars, it's impossible to overtake on the track. You'd need a car significantly faster than the one in front. I think the big reason for that is the high corner speeds and short braking distances from aerodynamic downforce. If you look at races with low downforce cars and motorcycles, there's a lot of passing. Nascar stock cars are big, fat and slow on a road course, but it's fun to watch because there's passing and you can really see the cars sliding around. The last few years MotoGP racing was dominated by Valentino Rossi and Honda, but the races were still close and not runaway wins. Now with Rossi switching to the slower Yamaha (he needed the challenge) this season has some great close racing. If you're bored of the F1 parade watch MotoGP! You don't know what you're missing.

Why they restrict things...

[JakiChan]

There are usually 2 reasons for a technology to get banned in F1. The first is that it makes things too easy. They want to make the drivers have to work for the victory. That's why they removed launch control - launching the car takes skill (since you have way more power than traction). The other reason is to slow the cars down. The safety technology has trouble keeping up with speeds the cars are capable of, especially in the corners (where an accident is most likely). That's why the tyres have grooves, for example. They need to go slower. And this safety focus has helped - just look at 10 years ago when we lost 2 drivers in one weekend (including the great Senna) and nearly lost Rubens...

I consider myself a Tifosi but when Schumi is walking over everyone it's no fun. And then he loses but wins by default...I'd rather see some variety on the podium so that the end of the year is exciting. As it is I'm cheering for Jenson since I think he's doing great this season.

Re:Playing by 'team rules' is the problem

[tbuskey]

Try watching MotoGP motorcycle racing.

It *is* possible to overtake. Riders are pushing the limits of themselves, the suspension, the engine, and the tires. Oh - no pit stops either.

And one of the greatest riders ever, Rossi, switched from one of the best bikes ever (Honda) to Yamaha so now you're seeing him race at his limit too.

I find most car racing kinda boring after seeing the lead change 3 times in as many corners during MotoGP

Re:Background article

[Black Rabbit]

Keep in mind, though, Formula one is cutting edge in other ways.

Just look at the drivers listings.

CART is full of:

a) people on their way to F1
b) people retired from F1 (Mario Andretti, Emerson Fittipaldi)
c) people who couldn't make it in F1 (Michael Andretti, Alex Zanardi)

If I remember correctly, the year that Andretti Jr. and then-F1 champ Nigel Mansell switched places, Andretti couldn't make it more than five laps in his first three races combined, and came home with his tail between his legs halfway through the season. Nigel Mansel cleaned everybody's clocks!

So it's more than just technology. Americans can't get past the drive-fast-turn-left NASCAR mentality!

Re:The New Direction In Sports

[another_mr_lizard]

Ferrari's massive overspend means that they can find the quickest solution to an engineering problem, not the cleverest. For instance, the dramatic increase in exotic metals that have been used over the last few years (which has been curtailed somewhat this season) - smaller teams cannot compete with Ferrari's spending power and had to engineer a solution round the problems that didnt involve purchasing 15lbs of to solve overheating gearboxes.

Apologies if you didnt get the link to how this affects passing and aero, but aero was the last big engineering improvement in F1, again due to the cost. Windtunnels were rare even 10 years ago but are now seen as mandatory. Great engineering but it has changed the type of racing we see more dramatically than any tyre or engine change I can remember.

Subjective or not its not your opinions that matter. The ones that do belong to Bernie Ecclestone and the FIA. Viewing figures have plummeted over the last 5 years, as have the sponsorship deals and TV revenue. The FIA have made it quite clear that they believe the changes will focus the teams development into other areas and hopefully benefit the sport as a whole.

Re:The New Direction In Sports

[rodgerd]

Then who'll give a shit about F1? It's the pinnacle of car-based motorsport. Turning it into a technological little-league a la F3000 or Indy Lights will make it about as popular.

The easy way to inject a bit more interest in F1 would be if the best cars weren't being driven by the best driver. This is why MotoGP just got interesting, with the previously all-conqueroring Rossi leaving Honda (best bikes) and joining Yamaha (next best bikes). Made it very interesting.