2011 Formula 1 Grand Prix of Europe

Anyone else hoping that the gap between Webber and Vettel is a result of running different engine maps?...
Hope all you want, but unless Red Bull have Vettel's engine set to tortise, I wouldn't be reading too much into it. This isn't the first Grand Prix this year where Vettel has been well and truly off Webber's pace in FP1. It hasn't stopped him from setting fast times when it counts, though.
 
That is good point I hadn't thought about, it does remove the need for having 2 settings entirely... unless they can change those kinds of settings within the car on (yet another) steering wheel dial?
 
I believe the team does it.


currently, yes. Was talk of them doing it at the first pitstop, but they'd need to get the laptop plugged into the car very quickly! But as a result of the changes, what I mean is couldn't they have the mapping settings both loaded on the car and selectable via a steering wheel control?
 
Shots of Hulkenberg smashing the rear-left of Di Resta's race car in FP1;

IncrediblyBadHulk.jpg


Alonso's car pouring brake dust out of the right rear after only a few minutes of running... KERs running? If not then Alonso might be loading up the rear brake bias to compensate?

Natural order restored... Vettel fastest at the moment...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
BBC Radio Five Live commentators say that Vettel was running a test specification for Silverstone in FP1...

I'm not sure what they were testing, but they did mention the CBD. I missed the rest.
 
Interesting... if RB were running the type of map/overblow that they'll be using at Silverstone then that showed a loss of about 3 seconds against Webber. It would be fair to presume that all other variables would be as close as possible in such a test.

That won't transpose directly to Silverstone of course, but it's interesting nonetheless.
 
I think people are reading far too much into Vettel's lack of pace in FP1. It's not the first time this has happened this year - and on all the other occasions, he's been able to produce a fast lap when it counts.
 
I think people are reading far too much into Vettel's lack of pace in FP1. It's not the first time this has happened this year - and on all the other occasions, he's been able to produce a fast lap when it counts.

Exactly - and if RB were indeed running the 'evolution' map in preparation for Silverstone then his lack of relative pace means even less.

Tyres; Pirelli just tweeted this; ""Bearing in mind track evolution, the soft tyre seems to be about a second per lap quicker than the medium."
 
Tracks like this should be a big no for third drivers, only need a small mistake to ruin your team mates weekend. Let them have their sessions at nice big tracks with lots of run off.
 
Tracks like this should be a big no for third drivers, only need a small mistake to ruin your team mates weekend. Let them have their sessions at nice big tracks with lots of run off.

Who knew Paul Di Resta had a GTPlanet account? :D

EDIT: Forgot to post the FP2 times :D

Valencia2011FP2.jpg
 
Last edited:
Christian Horner "Questions Timing of Rule Changes" [Link (AutoSport)]

Christian Horner
It is slightly confusing with the technical directive that it was not addressed at the end of the year going into next year. Why has it been done mid-season, rather than like the F-duct or the double diffuser (that were allowed to remain on all season)? But at the end of the day, it is the same for everybody and we will deal with it starting at Silverstone.


When asked whether he was worried about the consequences of the changes on Red Bull Racing's title challenge;

Christian Horner
To be totally honest it is impossible to predict.

We know what benefit we see, but we don't know what benefit others see. I think in reality it will affect the front-running teams probably a very similar amount to be honest, but until we get to Silverstone it is impossible to predict.

Horner did suggest, however, that rival teams hoping the FIA rules directive would hamper Red Bull's overall form were likely to be disappointed.

Christian Horner
The secret to a quick car is that there is never a silver bullet, it would be wrong to expect that this has been the sole reason behind the performance of the car, either this year or last year or the year before that. It is one of those things.

We will deal with it, we will move on. We have some parts in the pipeline for Silverstone and hopefully we can be competitive there.
 
Webber way down the order, I know it's only practice but still.

There's no still about it. Practice is practice. Every team is trying out updates and each driver is running what the team wants. It really, really is not of any importance in regards to relative performance.
 
Exactly - FP times rarely mean anything at all. RB are testing various things so their times have been interesting at varying points of the two FPs so far.

The teams will be keeping an eye on each other and will have an idea what their competitiors' times might mean in relation to their own practice tests but that's as far as the importance of any practice time goes.

EDIT: Perez news; no 'ill effects' after practice sessions, he'll be racing :D
 
Last edited:
Valencia. :) I've got a good feeling. We've had 2 bad races and 1 good one, and Kobayashi really showed us what he could do here. However this is my favourite pass here and I've linked it many times on these forums.

 
Can someone explain to me why they just now decided blown diffusers are illegal, considering they were first introduced in f1 in 1983, and have been used since then on and off?
 
i know its only practice but still, kind of translates to it means nothing much but it would be handy to be at the front rather than lingering in the mid pack 6 tenths off the pace, its a sign of things to come in a way and i'm certain that things wont change 4 webber this race
 
Can someone explain to me why they just now decided blown diffusers are illegal, considering they were first introduced in f1 in 1983, and have been used since then on and off?

Blown diffusers aren't. Cold - or off-throttle - blown diffusers are.

Teams have been using an engine map to provide up to 40% of the exhaust flow when the throttle is completely shut, so that the blown diffuser is still being blown even when there should be minimal flow directed to them. It's been determined that this uses the engine itself as a moveable aerodynamic aid and they've been banned for some time.
 
Can someone explain to me why they just now decided blown diffusers are illegal, considering they were first introduced in f1 in 1983, and have been used since then on and off?

Because it's alot of money being poured into something which has little real world applications. Yes I know the hypocrisy of it. They also want to regulate downforce and clean up wake.

As for the off throttle ban that comes in for Silverstone, well that's a bit more complicated. I know Charlie wanted to stop it before it got out of hand, but I also heard some rumors about these things need to be outruled to lure VW and Audi into the sport. Which F1 desperately needs for 2014.
 
Blown diffusers aren't. Cold - or off-throttle - blown diffusers are.

Teams have been using an engine map to provide up to 40% of the exhaust flow when the throttle is completely shut, so that the blown diffuser is still being blown even when there should be minimal flow directed to them. It's been determined that this uses the engine itself as a moveable aerodynamic aid and they've been banned for some time.
But the issue I have is why they decided this mid season. It seems a little suspicious timing to me. They were using off-throttle blown diffuses in 2010.

I don't buy the argument of banning them as a movable movable aerodynamic device, as the same could be said about hot blown diffusers, when the driver is on throttle, which apparently is legal?
 
But the issue I have is why they decided this mid season. It seems a little suspicious timing to me. They were using off-throttle blown diffuses in 2010.

I don't buy the argument of banning them as a movable movable aerodynamic device, as the same could be said about hot blown diffusers, when the driver is on throttle, which apparently is legal?

Because the FIA were fine with how the engine maps were implemented at the start of the season/last season, but have felt the extremes the teams have gone too are going too far.
What the "extremes" and what "too far" are we don't know, but this is what Charlie Whiting has said - that they didn't like where this particular development was going. Presumably safety grounds or "spirit of the rules" are the reason.

Why do the FIA ban things mid-season? Because they can, because its somewhat their job to - to govern the sport's regulations. I agree that its a little tiresome to constantly re-write the rules mid-season but this is kind of necessary in this sport because its so technical. Its almost impossible to write regulations that can account for every single possile scenario while keeping them open. The FIA do want to promote technological development, but in what they consider the "right" way or in the "right" direction. This naturally means re-writing the rule book when the teams develop things outside the "spirit of the rules" or in a way the FIA doesn't like.

After so many seasons of this, I'm really not bothered about it. People say it stops creativity and innovation, but the teams always find new (or rather old) ways of finding performance and loopholes. Its an endless cycle which happens every year, and every year there is always fans complaining about it, usually fans of whichever team is winning and might be disadvantaged by it.

By the way, the whole blown diffusers concept is supposedly going to be banned by the team's request for next year I think on the same principles. So yes, the moveable aero argument does apply both ways, but altering engine maps is easier than altering the whole rear-end of the cars (or in the Renault's case - a completely new car almost).

There is also, of course, an element of paddock politics going on I imagine. As I have said before on this topic - Cosworth have struggled to implement the engine maps required for off-throttle blown diffusers (indeed, they are rather lacking on electronic engine management). Its quite likely some teams or Cosworth themselves have complained about it and made the suggestion it is moveable aero.
 
By the way, the whole blown diffusers concept is supposedly going to be banned by the team's request for next year I think on the same principles. So yes, the moveable aero argument does apply both ways, but altering engine maps is easier than altering the whole rear-end of the cars (or in the Renault's case - a completely new car almost).
But again hot blown diffusers have been used since 1983. I just don't see how they were allowed to use hot blown diffusers for 23 years without problems and now, their suddenly illegal, or soon to be next year.
 
I think you will find they haven't been used since 1983 because the engine electronics technology hasn't existed till now to make it useful enough. Simply blowing exhaust gasses through the diffuser isn't terribly useful when it only really helps on-throttle (without the engine maps to force "off-throttle"). There are very few corners where this gives any meaningful downforce. Not to mention aerodynamics and diffusers in general weren't very developed back then, ground effects and ultra-low ride heights were still generating plenty of downforce, it wasn't necessary to go to extremes with fancy diffusers or engine layouts because so much time was gained by developing more reliable cars, more powerful and lighter engines and generally developing aerodynamics.
Look back through the previous through years, where have the exhausts been located? Certainly no where near diffusers.

Sure, the idea of blown diffusers have existed for years (just as "double diffusers" had). But it hasn't really been put to the extreme as it has this year.

Anyway, I think this press conference covers the subject pretty well:
http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2011/6/12213.html

In particular, Ross Brawn's quote:
F1.com
Q: Ross?
RB: I think James probably touched on it very well there in terms of it not being a change of regulation; it’s a realisation. The things we were doing, that type of interpretation is not legal. I think the difficulty the FIA had is that the protagonists behind raising this issue were threatening to protest the cars and that was the difficulty they had. They couldn’t ignore that and once they were made aware of the technology I think they started to sympathise with the view that the people who were upset about it had, because the FIA didn’t discover this by themselves, they were alerted about it by a team. And once that ball started to roll, they probably had little choice but to decree what should happen. If they hadn’t have taken action, then it sounds like some teams were going to protest the situation to get clarity through the stewards and that wouldn’t be very good for Formula One. We want to avoid that at all costs because I know from experience that the stewards would find such a technical argument quite difficult to resolve and it would probably end up in the appeal courts again and that’s no good. I think it’s probably being dealt with in the best possible way but what we need now is absolute clarity on where we’re going with this and I think having the exhaust moved next year is very important because we don’t want this to end up as another argument of the type we had about traction control: what was traction control, what wasn’t traction control, what you could do, what you couldn’t do? We want clarity because, as you know, the traction control issue has not been discussed for several years, and we don’t want to have the exhaust blown issue being discussed and being a major distraction to what we’re doing. So we will cope - I think we will all cope this year. It will make a difference to the cars. We’ve got a new floor coming at Silverstone which is designed around that technology. We’ve got to decide what we’re going to do now but I think having the exhaust moved next year should bring clarity to this area. But there will be something else round the corner, as always in Formula One.
 
I think you will find they haven't been used since 1983 because the engine electronics technology hasn't existed till now to make it useful enough.
Clearly you are wrong. Here is a picture of the Renault RE40, clearly showing the use of blown diffuser.
 
Last edited:
Clearly you are wrong. Here is a picture of the Renault RE40, clearly showing the use of blown diffuser.

Ehem...

Simply blowing exhaust gasses through the diffuser isn't terribly useful when it only really helps on-throttle (without the engine maps to force "off-throttle"). There are very few corners where this gives any meaningful downforce.

Does the RE40 blow gasses OFF-throttle?
 
Does the RE40 blow gasses OFF-throttle?
That's not the point, if you are going to claim the reason for banning the cold blown diffusers is because it is a movable aerodynamics device, then hot blown diffusers would also fall under that ban, which have not been declared illegal even though they have been used for 23 years. (Not sure why the image didn't show up)
 
Blown diffusers have not been declared illegal. The teams have requested the exhausts have a mandated location on top of bodywork for next year to provide some clarity.
The only illegality and "moveable aero" is the "off-throttle" part currently.

Why the ordinary blown diffuser is not considered moveable aero or hasn't all this time is because it has never been used in this "extreme" way. The RE40 and the subsequent cars which used them did not have complicated diffuser designs and didn't really benefit much from it. Therefore it probably wasn't considered moveable aero because the FIA never considered it being a significant enough gain to worry about. After all, the driver's helmet is "moveable aero" but its such an insignificant point its not considered as such.
Its also worth pointing out (again) that this all has come about due to complaints from teams/engine suppliers, not from the FIA deciding to arbitrarily change the rules. They seemed to have genuinely not realised this interpretation....as Ross Brawn described.
 
As Ardius (and Ross Brawn :D ) have said; the technology has advanced rather quickly.

The FIA gave warning early this season on the issue of off-throttle-diffusion but the teams have had to be told to stop developing them. That's what the engineers do - improve solutions that are legal until they're told otherwise.

Sportscars have always had to dispatch large volumes of exhaust gases and F1 cars are no exception. Engineers have always tried to do that in an aerodynamically efficient way, I think you could successfully argue that aero tech and understanding in the early eighties was much less than it is now.

Exiting an exhaust beside a diffuser (as the picture above shows) is not the same as passing gas out specifically for processing by the diffuser. The FIA have warned the teams... the teams have carried on... the FIA have taken action.

The teams are actually lucky that the FIA have ameliorated with them and allowed a 90% ban rather than a 100% ban.
 
Back