2006 Australian GP Technical Review

With the Formula One teams and their cars on the road since the first Grand Prix, technical developments were scarce last weekend at Melbourne. Even the technical controversies had seemingly died down, and engine reliability improved after a spate of failures in Malaysia. Overall, the Australian weekend was low on technical novelties.

However, the layout of the Albert park circuit and the cooler/wetter weather kept the teams on their toes. Friday's practice sessions were only really used by the teams with a third car, as the track was still green and the teams wanted to save their engines for more running on Saturday.

But Saturday's sessions were interrupted by rain, and many teams were caught out without enough running the previous day. The errors the drivers then made on compromised settings lead to spins in both qualifying and race; the latter disrupting the flow of the race and forcing drivers to parade around behind the safety car, with rapidly cooling tyres.

Tyres

Three races in, and many teams are still in disarray over their tyre usage. Not getting the tyres to grip or providing a neutral balance has been the explanation by many teams suffering a lack of pace. Yet many other teams with the same tyre supply appear to have no problems.

Since the grooved tyre regulations were introduced, Formula One has enjoyed many years of stability in which the teams grew accustomed to the tyres. 2005 put the spanner in the works with the move to long life tyres, made to last the race distance. This rule change caught out several teams, as did this year's change back to mid-race tyre changes.

On the face of it, the switch from one tyre rule to another might appear easy for the teams. From softer to harder compounds and back again - from the outside, the big black round things still seem the same. We all know teams have the option of soft and hard compounds at each race anyway, so where's the difference?

Tyres remain an inexact science. The computer modeling, simulation and prediction for a construction or compound are all carried out, but it remains track testing that gives the engineers the real data on the tyres performance. This is in stark contrast with other tools, such as CFD work replacing wind tunnel testing or lap simulations selecting better set-ups.

Additionally, tyres are very car- or even driver-dependant. Every aspect that affects the car's performance around the lap is communicated through the four tyres to the track. Even if the cars all look the same, they all behave very differently at the contact patch.

When the long-life tyre rule was introduced last year, teams had to alter settings throughout the car; matching traction control settings, wing levels, damper set-up and suspension geometry all refined to match the tyres and to obtain the critical balance of grip and wear.

But the change back to multiple tyres per race, along with the switch to V8 engines, threw a lot of the teams' historical data out of the window, and they couldn't simply resort to set-ups used in 2005 or even 2004. Instead, they had to start the set-up process all over again.

The majority of testing is focused on tyre evaluation, even if other parts or systems on the car are being tested simultaneously. But the winter testing is carried out in Europe, and even if the weather in Spain (where most testing occurs) is consistent, it is also cooler than the majority of the races - and the build-up of rubber on the track is different too.

So a lot of the winter tyre testing is not truly representative. Only as the testing kicks off at the main European tracks during the season does the correlation get more accurate from the weather and track conditions.

Matching the car to the tyres is the fundamental task for the teams' engineers. If the team has a tyre problem, there is not the same fallback to computer predictions that would direct them to the solution. Only testing and lots of running will provide the right combination of set-up and compound/construction.

It's not surprising that in between Malaysia and Australia many teams came back to Europe with test chassis - some even sending their race drivers back to carry out the testing. Teams that appear to have a fundamental issue in making the most of their tyres will have several more races before they have enough testing and race mileage to pinpoint the solution.

Spins and safety car periods

The weather in Melbourne was a lot cooler and wetter this year; the lack of running on a dry track exacerbated the problems for teams sensitive to tyres. This year, the tyre choice for qualifying and hence the race can be made on Saturday morning, rather than late on Friday under the previous rules. The extra time helped, but teams had to make an educated guess on tyre choice, and, again, rule changes this year meant that Saturday only provides one practice session.

But Saturday's sessions were affected by rain, which meant the teams had little time to perfect their set-up and headed into the race without the certainty in their tyres as they are used to.

Several teams found themselves with problems getting the crucial heat into their tyres, while the optional softer tyre could not be guaranteed to last the stints in the race if the weather warmed up. With harder tyres, drivers were finding the cars more skittish, and several drivers spun while trying hard on their less than optimal tyres.

Then, in the race, the delayed start, safety car periods and continued colder weather lead to tyres dropping below their working temperature. Cold tyres affect the car when it is accelerating - in traction, braking and cornering. The former particularly hampered Jenson Button at the restarts, and many other drivers were affected in other sections of the race.

Flexi wings

After two races with controversy over flexible bodywork, the rows seem to have died down. Three teams are reported to have arrived at Melbourne with revised wings - Ferrari being the most notable. Although their rear wing appeared unchanged, the upper front wing has been modified.

In Malaysia, this wing appeared to move away from the nosecone as the main wing flexed. For Australia, the wing/nose cone mounting was revised, with a smaller fairing added around the wing's profile. At first this appeared to be a simple shroud to hide the movement. But photography of the parts after the team's various crashes over the weekend showed it is clear that the two parts are more securely fastened, as the end of the wing and fairing have been ripped apart in the impact.

McLaren are believed to have altered their shelf wing, mounted between the spine of the engine cover and flip-ups. This part has a very slim mounting where it meets the engine cover, and it is this area that may have been revised.

BMW-Sauber were also reported to have been asked to revised their rear wing, but close inspection of the wings show no external differences to those raced in the previous two Grands Prix.

Technical developments

Super Aguri

Super Aguri appeared with their third front wind endplate in as many races. The cascade flap over the front wing is more sculpted than other solutions © Scarborough (Click image to enlarge)

Only two developments were noticed over the weekend. Super Aguri arrived as promised with a revised front wing. This now sports new endplates (the team's third this year) with a Renault-style cascade flap, although the wing profile remains the same. Their arrangement makes a very deep undercut under the flap, and the frontal profile sees the inner end flick up dramatically.

BMW Sauber

As well as the allegedly revised rear wing, BMW had slightly revised Front wing endplates with a long flick-up running along the outer edge of an otherwise unchanged endplate.

One other detail noticed on the BMW-Sauber was two pairs of fins (yellow) around the rear brake ducts. Rules regarding what constitutes a brake duct have been freed up this year, in a minor clarification agreed by the FIA with the Technical Working Group.

For many years, small flicks and fins have been mounted to the front brake ducts, and last year some teams appeared with similar designs with no inlets. This broke the spirit of the rules regarding the area around the front wheel that inferred that bodywork should be a brake duct. This rule specifies the maximum width and heights where bodywork can be used to act as a brake duct.

What has now been agreed is this area is free to any interpretation of duct/bodywork, so no longer do the parts have to masquerade as ducts and be used solely for aero benefit.

BMW Sauber have exploited the revised brake duct regulations at the rear with two small fins (yellow) to smooth the flow behind the car © Scarborough (Click image to enlarge)

While Ferrari, McLaren, Toyota and Renault all have interpretations of brake ducts around the front wheels, BMW-Sauber have applied this to the rear, with two low placed fins on what is otherwise quite a slim brake duct.

>Reliability and technical issues

Most teams found reliability, having switched their engines for new after completing two race distances. The stop-start nature of Albert Park places a heavy demand on the engine, but the cooler weather offset some of that penalty this year.

BMW have suffered failures at both races so far, and Jacques Villeneuve had an old engine in the car for Friday, while Nick Heidfeld had a new BMW unit. Issues with production tolerance caused the failures in the last two races, so Heidfeld had an engine built with hand-matched parts to preserve reliability. Another engine problem for Villeneuve on Friday (plus one for third Driver Robert Kubica) allowed him to take another one of the hand-fettled units for the race.

Equally, Williams had new Cosworth engines after a double retirement in Malaysia. The new units have been revised since the Malaysian race to improve reliability.

With very little running done on the cool opening day, along with the rain affected third session on Saturday and in Qualifying, reliability was remarkably good all weekend. There were only minor issues for most teams, as well as a fuel feed problem for Giancarlo Fisichella on Friday, costing him time on the drier track.

It was the same story for everyone else in the race, where retirements were more as a result of crashes than mechanical failures. Tiago Monteiro had a mechanical problem, forcing him out of the race. Mark Webber also retired due to what may be a gearbox problem; his engine was still running, so the hydraulics were clearly working, as the throttle was still blipping the engine, something that requires the hydraulics to be running.

Then, Juan Pablo Montoya stopped out on track after a particularly rough ride over the kerbs - somehow the electronics appeared to have failed and shut down the engine. The flashing of the tail lamp after the car run over the kerbs on to the main straight suggested all was not well, and Montoya coasted to a halt along the pit wall.

The last retirement came in the final seconds of the race, when unexpectedly Button's Honda engine blew up, the smoke and flames engulfing the chasing Fisichella. As the engine had died, the car would not make it to the line as it was still in gear with engine to drive the hydraulics. However, Button was instructed to stop the car short of the finish line to allow him a penalty-free new engine, despite this potentially costing him three points.