f1
Latest News:

2014 Russian Grand Prix Countdown

Days
Hours
Minutes
Seconds

Goto Page: Previous12345Next
Current Page: 4 of 5
 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
K1 (IP Logged)
12 January, 2012 07:51
if i recall correctly the decision to go with renault was made last july so there has been more than ample time to integrate the engine with the new chassis as it is developed.

 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
pgj (IP Logged)
12 January, 2012 08:00
I am very positive about the engine. Getting that was the best bit of news we have had since we signed with BMW.

I would have liked to be judging personnel changes on performance rather the dreaded potential.

Perhaps everything will be alright on the night and my musings will be consigned to the pessimism trash bin.



Williams and proud of it.

 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
Gunk (IP Logged)
12 January, 2012 10:15
How It All Went Wrong According to Sam

This was posted on the Autosport forum yesterday:

Quote:
From the horses mouth, a review on the FW33 from Sam Michael.
The team took a bold direction with the FW33 but it didn't work out.

"As soon as double diffusers were banned," Michael explains, "we looked and said, right, the fastest single diffuser car in '09 was the Red Bull RB5 and Adrian Newey designed it with a very low gearbox and driveshafts. We went a whole step lower and embarked on it early because we had to do a lot to make the driveshafts survive.

"Making the gearbox small was quite straightforward. People said we'd lose all the stiffness but it was no less stiff than a normal 'box.

"By dropping the gearbox height the airflow to the rear lower wing is better. When we got rid of the double diffuser and looked at the rear lower wing for 2011, it had increased downforce three-fold. It became clear you had to make it work. The whole concept was about that."

The team used Toyota's electric dyno in Cologne, and after some early test failures, had no problems, the only issue being a failure when Barrichello got stones in a driveshaft boot in Australia and the joint dried out. And, despite the extreme solution, Michael estimates that power loss was less than 0.5 bhp.

Having moved heaven and earth to get better flow to the lower rear wing, something spoiled it which Williams could do nothing about.

"The engine restricted us taking full advantage," Michael explained. "It's homologated and you cannot change it. That's why the cover was shrink-wrapped around it. It looked pretty ugly but you can't change that - that's as small as we could make it. The Renault is different in that the back of its trumpet tray funnels very heavily. It wasn't like that on the Cosworth."

In light of that, Michael concedes that "We probably spent too much energy for the company's resources making the gearbox work. Going from a high pushrod gearbox to a pullrod consumed a lot of the design office. It created quite a bit of conflict.

"It took a lot of energy away from areas like the exhaust. We didn't do a top job on the blown exhausts even though our 2010 blown diffuser worked pretty well. We took our eye off the ball with that. In terms of running the exhausts down where Red Bull were, we didn't think of that, so we spent most of the year catching up on blown diffusers."

Williams first tried a Red Bull type-system at the Chinese GP but burning was problematic and it was not until almost halfway through the year that progress was made.

The team did not have hot-blowing either and it's perhaps not surprising that Williams looked its best at Silverstone, when Maldonado qualified seventh. That was the race where everyone else's hot blowing was restricted and Williams debuted a new blown diffuser.

Michael says that the team's KERS was also quite heavy, over 30kgs, and that the harvesting and brake balance needed to be better. It was done to a tight budget with Cosworth control systems.

Unfortunately, the poster didn't provide a link. We still don't know any more about the floor breaking issue.

 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
pgj (IP Logged)
12 January, 2012 10:26
Thank you. It is a shame that we cannot verify the story. Still a good read. thumbs down



Williams and proud of it.

 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
mayhemfunkster (IP Logged)
12 January, 2012 11:00
Good read. Thanks (Sm128)



mayhemlurker ;-)

 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
Bond (IP Logged)
12 January, 2012 18:52
Great article Gunk! Many thanks.

It confirmed what we have been interpreting from bits & pieces since the middle of this past season.

Things are becoming clearer & painting a picture for our closure on the 2011 season.

So a couple things that I take away from that article:

1) The gearbox worked on its own but the move caused changes in other areas of the car & devoting time to make it work caused resources to be taken away ($ & people) from other areas -critical in that a small budgeted team can't mis-allocate resources.

2) The Cosworth engine couldn't be changed because of the rules & so literally compromised full air flow thru to the rear in conjunction with the new low profile gearbox positioning.

3) Toyota rents out cologne factory for private use as had been reported before - just wasn't aware Williams took advantage of it.

4) Cosworth's inability to come up with hot-blowing in conjunction with Williams not being able to figure out how to get the exhaust piping moved down low is now confirmed. Lack of resources & talent in these areas?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/01/2012 19:00 by Bond.

 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
PastorCrashdonado (IP Logged)
12 January, 2012 19:23
Quote:
Gunk
How It All Went Wrong According to Sam
Unfortunately, the poster didn't provide a link. We still don't know any more about the floor breaking issue.

[www.grandprix.com]

 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
pgj (IP Logged)
12 January, 2012 21:46
thumbs down



Williams and proud of it.

 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
K1 (IP Logged)
12 January, 2012 22:25
if that report is correct it somehow proves the point re development of the WSG. the cosworth design profile was a known quantity and failure to reconcile that factor with the required aero demands seems to be a fundamental error that should not have been made.

surely the wind tunnel would have thrown up some serious deviations? i suppose that timing would have been a critical factor insofar as the WSG had quite a long gestation but i find it all rather amateurish.

it also appears to confirm that there was some disssatisfaction on the allocation of funds to try and rectify this anomaly. maybe the poster who came on board last year to highlight the discord internally was in fact dead right.

i guess the question is, will williams continue on with the WSG as part of this years car? SM's comment re the trumpet tray seems to indicate that they will. interesting.

 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
j-s (IP Logged)
13 January, 2012 01:28
That's a great article, thanks Gunk.

Interesting to see how it was tracked down to grandprix.com. I confess i hadn't snooped around that site for a while, as I only read Saward's blog.

Seems like there's room for optimism with renault engine. Good to know the small gearbox could've been a worthy part in any other car (well, any other non-cossie car).

I wonder if we'll see some small boxes this year.

 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
Mr. Pink (IP Logged)
13 January, 2012 08:04
Quote:
"I was pleased with Pastor," Michael says. "I think he's really good. He ran Rubens pretty close all year and I rate Rubens. I think he'll be better again in his second year after learning all the tracks. He definitely deserves his place in F1. His first four or five races were pretty rough, but that's what you get with a rookie."

If he gets better and we get that amount of money from his backers its a perfect combination.

Regarding WSG, I am sure it will be on the car this year.



http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/8830/logoqz0.gif
Sir Frank: "It's what we do, we love doing it. It's like oxygen, it fixes you".

 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
pgj (IP Logged)
13 January, 2012 08:17
Picking up an earlier point, we were not due to get our first Renault engine until January. I have no doubt that we will have been using mock-ups but no running race engine. Probably would not cause too many problems at this stage.



Williams and proud of it.

 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
azouris (IP Logged)
13 January, 2012 10:38
Quote:
K1
if that report is correct it somehow proves the point re development of the WSG. the cosworth design profile was a known quantity and failure to reconcile that factor with the required aero demands seems to be a fundamental error that should not have been made.
surely the wind tunnel would have thrown up some serious deviations? i suppose that timing would have been a critical factor insofar as the WSG had quite a long gestation but i find it all rather amateurish.

it also appears to confirm that there was some disssatisfaction on the allocation of funds to try and rectify this anomaly. maybe the poster who came on board last year to highlight the discord internally was in fact dead right.

i guess the question is, will williams continue on with the WSG as part of this years car? SM's comment re the trumpet tray seems to indicate that they will. interesting.
Mike coughlan said that some strategic errors were made wrong in the past.Re-wsg he said that it was a gample between vehicle dynamics performance and aerodynamics,the cost from the first would be outweighed by the second and we all know the outcome.Its on the cristmas ignition.

Mike said also that the driveshaft will not be so angled in next years car becuse it adds weight to the suspension

 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
pgj (IP Logged)
13 January, 2012 13:47
I am hoping that it all starts to go right for Williams from here on in for a change. We have had so many false dawns in recent years that it would be very nice to feel the sun on our backs for a (long) while.(Sm60)



Williams and proud of it.

 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
rrafekaj (IP Logged)
15 January, 2012 21:31
i think these are the current engines CA11 and RS27...?


http://www.cosworth.com/media/137836/Cosworth_CA2010_02_TierThreeFourMainImgLarge.jpg

http://cdn-6.motorsport.com/static/img/mgl/400000/440000/449000/449300/449386/s1_1.jpg

 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
j-s (IP Logged)
16 January, 2012 17:40
Beautiful pics. Both look stunning. If only the cosworth worked as well as it looked.

 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
pgj (IP Logged)
16 January, 2012 18:06
Can't understand why someone like Toyota did not put the money up to have the engine developed and badged. There is nothing wrong with the engineering - just the development budget.



Williams and proud of it.

 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
rrafekaj (IP Logged)
16 January, 2012 18:08
Yeah.. if only i could shoehorn one in my car.
it's clear to see the renault is the neater package.

 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
rrafekaj (IP Logged)
16 January, 2012 18:18
I'm guessing the bit they couldn't shift is where the actual Cosworth badge and PDVSA logo shape thingy reside...
http://scarbsf1.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/twitpic_fw33.jpg?w=300&h=300

 
Re: How It All Went Wrong At Williams . . . by Adam Cooper
fyujj (IP Logged)
17 January, 2012 00:59
I didn't know where to post this with so many threads...
But the expectancy for a good result shouldn't make us forget some obvious stuff.
I.e., in 2010, one couldn't really expect much with Cosworth in its first year (and as proved by last year, also without the same budget to be on top like the manufacturers) but considering that, Williams did quite well.
Last year was very bad but, although we didn't know beforehand about the hot blowing (and Williams/Cosworth not having it) there was one thing that we knew and it was KERS.
One could only hope but the probabilities of a new KERS/Cosworth combination to even work close to proven ones like McLaren/Mercedes', Ferrari's and Renault's were almost zero (as SM seem to have confirmed). Take it that even RedBull had problems and in their case at least the engine manufacturer had experience with it.
And to the point of the thread, when I heard Cosworth didn't have hot blowing I sensed that was the main weakness performance wise. A testimony of that was just how quick Renault was at the start of the year. Heildfeld would fly on turns almost like a RedBull because their front exaust was a jump on the competition (only they wouldn't keep the development pace and the more powerful teams would catch up quickly in and out of the track - yes the politics is important in F1).

Now for the next year: team is improving in many areas but it's difficult to expect too much. I would point out two things:
- pit stop performance: MJ's partnership shows the team knows it must improve but just look at what Mercedes does with that (with the articles they put in Autosport) to see that it takes some to get to the top (although Mercedes may have gone a bit too far with their 'flying wheels').
- drivers: Williams made a deal with Bottas so he'll be driving 15(!) Fridays and IIRC announced they wanted an experienced 'second' driver exactly because of that (announcing also, again IIRC, that Pastor was prepared to 'lead' the team). Things have evolved, of course, and the announcement then just reflects their expectations at the time but if B.Senna is to be the other driver then there we go again to the 'hope' terrain. Because yes, we can even expect that he (or Pastor, BTW) may go well some weekend in spite of not training but in formula one these 'seemingly small' disadvantages make the difference so be prepared to include that in your expectations.

Goto Page: Previous12345Next
Current Page: 4 of 5

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net
 
 

Who is online?

Total users online:  

Most users online:  

Users on this site:  

Where are they?