48 replies to this topic

[Tamworthbay]

Interesting that the latest statement from Pirelli says:
 
The teams had put the rear tyres intended for the right side of the car on the left to gain a competitive advantage, had run them at lower pressures than recommended by the manufacturer and used extreme cambers. They also contended that the kerbs at fast corners, and specifically turn four, were also "particularly aggressive".
 
So, nobody comes out of it well, but the teams themselves must accept much of the blame.
 
Bob

I saw this as well, but there was no mention of running lefts on the right side. If they were using directional tyres in the wrong direction they only have themselves to blame and I think a court would look very harshly on it if someone was to be killed as a result and someone filed a case against them. It all comes down to whether Pirelli say the tyres 'should' be used that way or 'must' be used that way.

[surfblue63]

Interesting that the latest statement from Pirelli says:

 

The teams had put the rear tyres intended for the right side of the car on the left to gain a competitive advantage, had run them at lower pressures than recommended by the manufacturer and used extreme cambers. They also contended that the kerbs at fast corners, and specifically turn four, were also "particularly aggressive".

 

So, nobody comes out of it well, but the teams themselves must accept much of the blame.

 

Bob

 

I think that's just more arse coverng drival from Pirelli. Massas tyre failed before turn four and both Verne and Perez had failures on the Hanger Straight. There were no problems in the Porsche SuperCup or GP2 races, so blaming the kerbs is rubbish. Also the British GP is not the first race were multiple blow outs have happened this year (Bahrain and Valencia).

Also did anyone notice any teams with extreme camber on the rear? I didn't. The only extreme cambers I've seen this year are on the front of the Red Bull. Four different teams suffered blow outs and various others reported damage, your not teling me that they all run their tyres outside the recommended specifications.

Pirelli are squirming and know that they need to do something and fast.

Edited by surfblue63, 03 July 2013 - 05:26 PM.

[surfblue63]

I've just read some interesting info on the web about the 2005 Michellin tyres that were no good at Indy, and suffered multiple blow outs the year before at the Belgium GP. They had a steel belted inner construction. Anyone see a theme developing here?

 

http://www.sportskee...een-the-reason/

 

 

 

Immediately after the end of the race, the common view was that the kerb at Turn 4 was the culprit, which was damaged and had a sharp step as a result. As an afterthought, it seems to be one of the less probable reasons because two of the four failures occurred down the Hangar straight immediately after the heavily-loaded Maggots and Becketts corners. Did the tyres take almost half a lap to fall apart after sustaining damage from the kerb? Improbable.

So we can totally eliminate this possibility? Maybe it will be better to learn about a similar case nine years ago at the Spa-Francorchamps circuit and then make a decision.

There were many striking similarities between then and now. Both Michelin(then) and Pirelli(now) had supplied steel-belt tyres. Both tracks have some very high speed corners. Both had a kerb with a small step on the inside. In 2004, Michelin put the matter to bed by blaming the kerb behind the multiple failures during that race.

 

 

But what actually happens when the tyres hit such a damaged kerb? Oscillations are induced into them after running over the kerbs. To be more precise standing waves are generated which can sometimes produce stresses beyond which the design permits. Infact, these standing waves were the reason behind Michelin runners suffering heavily on the long banked curve at Indianapolis back in 2005 and boycotting the race purely for safety reasons- a separate case altogether but having some similarities.

Another interesting point is that Kevlar has much better damping properties than steel, so if a Kevlar belt would have been present the oscillations would not have reached alarming proportions. Remember we didn’t see any such problems in Silverstone last year when the situation was quite similar with a wet Friday and a sunny Sunday. Why this weather pattern needs to be discussed? Because the teams didn’t have enough dry long running data either last year or this year, so lack of data can be ruled out as a potential cause.

 

 

Edited by surfblue63, 03 July 2013 - 05:52 PM.

[Ivor Badger]

One of the problems is that teams have been swapping tyres from side to side. according to the Autosport board, this means the tyres have the wrong sidewall on the car. The ineer becomes the outer and vice versa. Obviously this is a factor of starting on the tyres you qualify on. This combined with excessive kerb cutting, again see photos on Autosport. + wrong pressures and camber caused most of the problems.

 

The reason for swapping tyres is to put the better state inner on the outside for the race. Must check if drivers starting 11th or greater suffered tyre failure.

 

Ok, just checked and only Hamilton would have started on the tyres he qualified on.

 

Other thought, which of the drivers on the grid are the worst at cutting corners?

Edited by Ivor Badger, 03 July 2013 - 07:07 PM.