Red Bull might be using traction control

[N4D13]

Hi everyone. Autosprint has published a report (http://www.auto.it/autosprint/formula_1/2013/06/17-13394/Le+strane+tracce+della+Red+Bull) which states that Red Bull might be using traction control, as evidenced by the tyre marks left by Webber at the Canadian GP. Now, I haven't seen this in Autosport or anything like that, but it's worth keeping an eye on, isn't it?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxig8iM7jDU

[Bruce D]

I would have thought that if those tyre marks were like that then the traction control should have been audible, or maybe they could be using TC system that controls the brakes, like a lot of road cars do, rather than cutting the cylinders like the old TC systems did.

[vhatever]

1. traction control is pretty easy to pick up on by ear around corners. Having sat through many full audio pole position laps by vettel, you can hear nothing of the sort.
2. There is another skidmark you can see in the upper lefthand corner of the screen at the very end of the video with a similar skid pattern.
3. it's pretty much impossible to pull off with the regs/scrutineering process these days.
4. autusprint? If this was a serious indication of anything s ton more people would have noted and report it on it. This is just a combination of the ambient conditions and going from heavy braking to full throttle. If anything, there wouldn't be any skid marks at all especailly in a straight line with traction control.

[AndyL]

If Google Translate can be believed, the person who sent the picture to Autosprint thought it might be the result of resonance or oscillation in the rear suspension.

[Mark]

Back in the day when everyone could code their own ECU systems, there was all sorts of ways to obfuscate your code to make it look like something completely different when it was actually traction control. However now with standardised ECU systems this is (almost) impossible to do.

[dj_bytedisaster]

It's an Italian paper and Ferrari has not been winning. That's all the explanation you need, really.

[N4D13]

All right, thanks a lot everyone! :)

[henners88]

I mentioned this in another thread earlier today (sorry beat ya to it N4D13 :p ) so have moved my post:

Rumours are starting to surface about another possible advantage Red Bull may have. You have to love F1, they all find ways to accuse each other of cheating lol I spotted this on twitter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zxig8iM7jDUThe video shows Mark Webber gaining what is described as too much traction after touching the Caterham. He leaves marks which Italian magazine Autosprint has suggested could be a TC system on the car. I'd love it if true, but I do think this is yet another attack on Newey's almost flawless design. Lets see if the FIA decide to investigate :)
http://www.motorsportforums.com/f1/158672-vettel-may-quit-5-years-4.html#post1139927

[TheFamousEccles]

Looks like good ol' axle tramp to me... ;)

[CaptainRaiden]

Well, Webber is awfully slow even with that traction control.

[schmenke]

Could that simply be the result of a bumpy road surface? :mark:

[MAX_THRUST]

Uneven road surface I reckon or really good throttle control, more likely uneven road surface. Would love it if they were using traction control, cause what we need is another scandal....

[Bruce D]

1. traction control is pretty easy to pick up on by ear around corners. Having sat through many full audio pole position laps by vettel, you can hear nothing of the sort.

There is a form of traction control that brakes each individual wheel rather than cylinder-cutting, which is the audible version which was common in F1.

[vhatever]

There is a form of traction control that brakes each individual wheel rather than cylinder-cutting, which is the audible version which was common in F1.


It would be bone stupid to put such a traction control on a race car, however.

[Zico]

It would be bone stupid to put such a traction control on a race car, however.


Why is that?

[Knock-on]

Why is that?

They FIA wouldn't let a team get away with using TC :dork:

Doh!

(BTW, I think this rumour is twaddle for the record unlike the 'other' time ;) )

[dj_bytedisaster]

Not to mention that an illegal TCS wouldn't quite fit with their higher-than-others tyre degradation. If anything it should be lower in that case.

[Zico]

They FIA wouldn't let a team get away with using TC :dork:

Doh!



Yeah, I was kinda aware of that Knockie. ;)

[wedge]

According to Scarbs the tyre marks are caused by drivetrain oscillation https://mobile.twitter.com/ScarbsF1/status/347251495542083584

[Zico]

According to Scarbs the tyre marks are caused by drivetrain oscillation https://mobile.twitter.com/ScarbsF1/status/347251495542083584

Hitting the rev limiter might have a similar effect?

[Knock-on]

Yeah, I was kinda aware of that Knockie. ;)

Sorry mate, there was an English attempt at sarcasm built in there along the lines of:

The FIA wouldn't allow them to get away with that now, would they. No, no, no, of course the FIA wouldn't allow TC on any cars. Especially cars that say they haven't got it and then when it's pointed out they have got it deny that it can be operated from the cockpit during a race and then when it's pointed out that it can be operated in the cockpit during the race but pressing a secret sequence of buttons, they then claim that the drivers didn't know how to do this and even although there's photographic evidence that TC was being used, the FIA STILL refuse to punish them.

Nope. Never. That couldn't possibly happen now, could it ;)

(British Sarcasm. It's a bugger to live with. Sorry)

[steveaki13]

(British Sarcasm. It's a bugger to live with. Sorry)

But impossible to live without

[Zico]

Sorry mate, there was an English attempt at sarcasm built in there along the lines of:

The FIA wouldn't allow them to get away with that now, would they. No, no, no, of course the FIA wouldn't allow TC on any cars. Especially cars that say they haven't got it and then when it's pointed out they have got it deny that it can be operated from the cockpit during a race and then when it's pointed out that it can be operated in the cockpit during the race but pressing a secret sequence of buttons, they then claim that the drivers didn't know how to do this and even although there's photographic evidence that TC was being used, the FIA STILL refuse to punish them.

Nope. Never. That couldn't possibly happen now, could it ;)

(British Sarcasm. It's a bugger to live with. Sorry)



Ah, I've read enough of your posts over the years and should have recognised it, sorry bud.

[vhatever]

Ah, I've read enough of your posts over the years and should have recognised it, sorry bud.


Unfortunately, in this case, you have to also deal with the British "creative history/memory".

They didn't find any traction control. They found code for launch control, which is more or less useless outside of the first 3 seconds of a race. and they got a reprimand for it. You know, those things lewis hamilton always gets instead of a real punishment?


Why is that?

Because it would have the net effect of slowing the car down. Traction control would better me named "maximal power/torque control"

[vhatever]

Why is that?

Because it would have the net effect of slowing the car down. Traction control would better me named "maximal power/torque control"

[Knock-on]

Being a newish member of the Forum Vhatever ( :devil: ) you will not be aware that this has been discussed and proven. First they lied they didn't TC (not just launch control which propelled Schumy from 3rd past DH into first) and then they claimed it couldn't be operated during a race which was later disproved. The only thing that stopped the FIA taking action was that it couldn't be proved that they did actually use it. There might also have been a desire to sweep this under the carpet after other terrible F1 instances that year. Too much negative publicity for F1 already.

This is really history now so why not take it there as I don't use that forum and won't have to read it :p

[vhatever]

Being a newish member of the Forum Vhatever ( :devil: ) you will not be aware that this has been discussed and proven. First they lied they didn't TC (not just launch control which propelled Schumy from 3rd past DH into first) and then they claimed it couldn't be operated during a race which was later disproved. The only thing that stopped the FIA taking action was that it couldn't be proved that they did actually use it. There might also have been a desire to sweep this under the carpet after other terrible F1 instances that year. Too much negative publicity for F1 already.

This is really history now so why not take it there as I don't use that forum and won't have to read it :p


So sorry to debunk your fairy tales, good chap.

[dj_bytedisaster]

So sorry to debunk your fairy tales, good chap.

You do understand that you're trying really hard to make a fool of yourself, do you? If you had any real interest in F1 you'd bin the fanboyism.

[vhatever]

You do understand that you're trying really hard to make a fool of yourself, do you? If you had any real interest in F1 you'd bin the fanboyism.


If I'm a fool, I can't imagine what that makes you and knock on.

[dj_bytedisaster]

If I'm a fool, I can't imagine what that makes you and knock on.

It makes us people, who've been around here for over a decade and know a thing or twelve about F1, especially about the past. We also don't go about picking a fight with just about everyone. If you wanna argue, wait for Sunday, when Gary Walker will log on and post his traditional Vettel rant. With him being a certified Vettel hater and you being a Vettel fanboy, the resulting fireworks could be entertaining for the rest of us :D

[vhatever]

It makes us people, who've been around here for over a decade and know a thing or twelve about F1, especially about the past. We also don't go about picking a fight with just about everyone. If you wanna argue, wait for Sunday, when Gary Walker will log on and post his traditional Vettel rant. With him being a certified Vettel hater and you being a Vettel fanboy, the resulting fireworks could be entertaining for the rest of us :D


Spare me shining your "I've been wasting my time in this forum for over a decade" merit badge. I have better things to do. How about you get back on topic and dispense with the ad hominem garbage.

[dj_bytedisaster]

Spare me shining your "I've been wasting my time in this forum for over a decade" merit badge. I have better things to do. How about you get back on topic and dispense with the ad hominem garbage.

I've never perceived the time in here as wasting my time, but that's a different topic. Seriously, you talking about ad hominem attacks is like Dr. Mengele explaining bedside manners. Do you want me to give you a list of how many ad hominem attacks you've managed to put into your 187 posts so far?

As for the topic itself - I cannot understand why that is even discussed. The credibility of the 'proof' of RB's alleged TCS is even lower than the ridiculous yellow-flag-gate the Ferrari brigade cooked up last year after Brazil. The whole thing was launched by an Italian rag that hasn't really got much of a track record in terms of impartial journalism and there's a reason that 'serious' media haven't even bothered to mention something as ridiculous as that.

[airshifter]

Spare me shining your "I've been wasting my time in this forum for over a decade" merit badge. I have better things to do. How about you get back on topic and dispense with the ad hominem garbage.

Back on topic, past instances you don't admit are proven and now history.

Your recent statement that traction control would make cars slower is nonsense as well.

[vhatever]

Back on topic, past instances you don't admit are proven and now history.

Your recent statement that traction control would make cars slower is nonsense as well.

Oh gee, f1's resident Sherlock holmes i presume, i bet you know better than the FIA and Liverpool Data and Research Associates-- who concluded- the best evidence is that Benetton Formula Ltd. was not using "launch control" (an automatic start system) at the 1994 San Marino Grand Prix.

They found no true "traction control at all, either.

Benetton launch control FIA press release | News | Motorsport.com (http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/benetton-launch-control-fia-press-release/)

My "recent statement" is something that would appear obviously correct to anyone with basic physics knowledge and an IQ over 10.
Now go on back to making excuses for why lewy sucks and has trouble besting a journeyman.

[henners88]

Spare me shining your "I've been wasting my time in this forum for over a decade" merit badge. I have better things to do. How about you get back on topic and dispense with the ad hominem garbage.
If Carlsberg did irony lol.

[Tel 911S]

As someone with a basic physics knowledge & an IQ of over 10 I do know how much difference traction control can make to acceleration , and unlike some , I also know that it will leave tyre marks as maximum traction/drive happens at about 20% wheel spin .

[dj_bytedisaster]

Isn't the whole point of a TCS to avoid wheelspin? Webber leaving 20m worth of elevenses would make RB's mystery TCS the most useless device in the world...

[Tel 911S]

No , the purpose of a TCS for competition use is to maximise acceleration , and as max acceleration happens at about 20% wheelspin , then that is how they are set .

[dj_bytedisaster]

No , the purpose of a TCS for competition use is to maximise acceleration , and as max acceleration happens at about 20% wheelspin , then that is how they are set .

Acceleration at 20% wheelspin cannot be better than 0% wheelspin, as simple physics tell me that kinetic energy is converted to heat without propelling the car. What a load of rubbish.

[airshifter]

Oh gee, f1's resident Sherlock holmes i presume, i bet you know better than the FIA and Liverpool Data and Research Associates-- who concluded- the best evidence is that Benetton Formula Ltd. was not using "launch control" (an automatic start system) at the 1994 San Marino Grand Prix.

They found no true "traction control at all, either.

Benetton launch control FIA press release | News | Motorsport.com (http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/benetton-launch-control-fia-press-release/)

My "recent statement" is something that would appear obviously correct to anyone with basic physics knowledge and an IQ over 10.
Now go on back to making excuses for why lewy sucks and has trouble besting a journeyman.

The best evidence it didn't exist? From YOUR link:

"Analysis of this software, which had been used at the San Marino Grand Prix, revealed that it included a facility called "launch control". This is a system which, when armed, allows the driver to initiate a start with a single action. The system will control the clutch, gear shift and engine speed fully automatically to a predetermined pattern.Benetton stated that this system is used only during testing. Benetton further stated that "it (the system) can only be switched on by recompilation of the code". This means recompilation of the source code. Detailed analysis by the LDRA experts of this complex code revealed that this statement was untrue. "Launch control" could in fact be switched on using a lap-top personal computer (PC) connected to the gearbox control unit (GCU).
When confronted with this information, the Benetton representatives conceded that it was possible to switch on the "launch control" using a lap-top PC but indicated that the availability of this feature of the software came as a surprise to them."

"In the circumstances, I am not satisfied in accordance with Article 2.6 of the Formula One Technical Regulations that car number 5 (M.Schumacher) complied with the Regulations at all times during the San Marino Grand Prix and I therefore submit this matter to the World Council for their consideration.
Charlie Whiting FIA Formula One Technical Delegate"


If you want to prove a case, don't link something that disproves it. They had onboard systems that were illegal. I'm not sure where your comments on Lewis come from, but being you are close minded and apparently don't deal with facts, you making assumptions doesn't shock me at all.

But please, continue with your kid stuff insults. People take you more seriously when you resort to not dealing with facts. :laugh:

[henners88]

The best evidence it didn't exist? From YOUR link:

"Analysis of this software, which had been used at the San Marino Grand Prix, revealed that it included a facility called "launch control". This is a system which, when armed, allows the driver to initiate a start with a single action. The system will control the clutch, gear shift and engine speed fully automatically to a predetermined pattern.Benetton stated that this system is used only during testing. Benetton further stated that "it (the system) can only be switched on by recompilation of the code". This means recompilation of the source code. Detailed analysis by the LDRA experts of this complex code revealed that this statement was untrue. "Launch control" could in fact be switched on using a lap-top personal computer (PC) connected to the gearbox control unit (GCU).
When confronted with this information, the Benetton representatives conceded that it was possible to switch on the "launch control" using a lap-top PC but indicated that the availability of this feature of the software came as a surprise to them."

"In the circumstances, I am not satisfied in accordance with Article 2.6 of the Formula One Technical Regulations that car number 5 (M.Schumacher) complied with the Regulations at all times during the San Marino Grand Prix and I therefore submit this matter to the World Council for their consideration.
Charlie Whiting FIA Formula One Technical Delegate"


If you want to prove a case, don't link something that disproves it. They had onboard systems that were illegal. I'm not sure where your comments on Lewis come from, but being you are close minded and apparently don't deal with facts, you making assumptions doesn't shock me at all.

But please, continue with your kid stuff insults. People take you more seriously when you resort to not dealing with facts. :laugh:
I'm surprised you trumped him with his own link considering you 'supposedly' only have an IQ of 10!! lol :)

[SGWilko]

If I'm a fool, I can't imagine what that makes you and knock on.

Light years above your level........

[airshifter]

Acceleration at 20% wheelspin cannot be better than 0% wheelspin, as simple physics tell me that kinetic energy is converted to heat without propelling the car. What a load of rubbish.

You are only looking at one part of the physics involved.

To find the maximum grip of the tire, you must break traction so that the system can detect the max rate of acceleration. Think of it as the inverse of anti lock brakes. If car A has no traction control and accelerates at 90% of max grip, it may be overcome by car B that uses traction control even if car B breaks traction at some points through the run. This is due to the averaging of the max grip level obtained. Though car B has some wheelspin and is thus possibly less efficient than car A at that point in time it might, as an example obtain 95% of max grip during the period there is no wheelspin taking place.

If the system is not aggressive enough to induce wheelspin, it is likely to be slower as it would never find that 100% traction.

An example in the real world would be that quite a few sports/muscle cars can get better "short" times in a drag race with traction control off, as the systems aren't aggressive enough to find max traction.


I agree that wheelspin of any kind is wasted energy, but in this case it's a matter of averages. To induce wheelspin you have to first achieve the max grip level, and the wheelspin only takes place when you exceed that level.

[Tel 911S]

Perhaps you should recheck your simple physics.

[Bagwan]

I've experienced this wheelskip , or "drivetrain oscillation" phenomenon , but only in front wheel drive vehicles .
It makes marks just like those , but , personally , I've never seen it from the rear tires on anything .

Looking at the video , there appears a black , repaired strip across the track that may constitute a bump that could cause such a skippy acceleration , but the action seems to begin before this strip .

Certainly , Mark was frustrated by the skirmish with the Caterham , and was likely to have mashed the pedal in response , from a slower speed than was usual in that corner .

One post earlier in the thread noted other , similar tracks in the frame , and while this promotes the idea that the track , itself , induces the effect , it may have been a Red Bull that made them as well .

I found it interesting as well , that this happened once Mark had straightened up the car , without the influence of lateral load , which can easily induce the effect with a bumpy surface .


I don't know .
It could be the "drivetrain oscillation" tempest in the formula teacup , but the video still looks a little odd to me .

[henners88]

You are only looking at one part of the physics involved.

To find the maximum grip of the tire, you must break traction so that the system can detect the max rate of acceleration. Think of it as the inverse of anti lock brakes. If car A has no traction control and accelerates at 90% of max grip, it may be overcome by car B that uses traction control even if car B breaks traction at some points through the run. This is due to the averaging of the max grip level obtained. Though car B has some wheelspin and is thus possibly less efficient than car A at that point in time it might, as an example obtain 95% of max grip during the period there is no wheelspin taking place.

If the system is not aggressive enough to induce wheelspin, it is likely to be slower as it would never find that 100% traction.

An example in the real world would be that quite a few sports/muscle cars can get better "short" times in a drag race with traction control off, as the systems aren't aggressive enough to find max traction.


I agree that wheelspin of any kind is wasted energy, but in this case it's a matter of averages. To induce wheelspin you have to first achieve the max grip level, and the wheelspin only takes place when you exceed that level.
Nice to see an intelligent explanation. :)

[Tel 911S]

You are only looking at one part of the physics involved.

To find the maximum grip of the tire, you must break traction so that the system can detect the max rate of acceleration. Think of it as the inverse of anti lock brakes. If car A has no traction control and accelerates at 90% of max grip, it may be overcome by car B that uses traction control even if car B breaks traction at some points through the run. This is due to the averaging of the max grip level obtained. Though car B has some wheelspin and is thus possibly less efficient than car A at that point in time it might, as an example obtain 95% of max grip during the period there is no wheelspin taking place.

If the system is not aggressive enough to induce wheelspin, it is likely to be slower as it would never find that 100% traction.

An example in the real world would be that quite a few sports/muscle cars can get better "short" times in a drag race with traction control off, as the systems aren't aggressive enough to find max traction.


I agree that wheelspin of any kind is wasted energy, but in this case it's a matter of averages. To induce wheelspin you have to first achieve the max grip level, and the wheelspin only takes place when you exceed that level.

It is a little difficult to get your head around , but the coefficient of friction is more when the tyre is moving slightly across the surface , than when it is not .
So your drag racing factor is correct , even if a car had a TCS which was 100% accurate up until the wheel spun , it would not be able to accelerate as fast as one which could just the right amount of spin .So a competition TCS would be set for just the right amount of spin .
Not that I am saying that they are being used in F1 of course .

[Knock-on]

Can we move the Benetton cheating to history and not feed the Troll.

The suspicion that RB is using LC or TC has no basis in fact and unless that changes, is just a conspiracy theory to explain away a brilliant car.

[Zico]

Because it would have the net effect of slowing the car down. Traction control would better me named "maximal power/torque control"


For the record I don't think they are using any form of TC but if they were it will no doubt be far more clever than anything you, I, or even the scrutineers can envisage.
There is no doubt that the fuel cut off/spark cut method would be preferable being the most effective form of TC but it has the downside of being very audible, easily identifiable which would make using a less effective but more discrete method the only option.
Yes It would be near impossible to hide but for arguments sake, while it would be a huge challenge, I'm pretty confident that it would be possible to make the brake pulse method of TC a viable enhancement for F1 cars from a performance POV. They could develop the system much further by allowing it to detect and operate far faster and also make the brake pulse inputs fully variable dependant on a multi axis multi dimensional map based on rpm, speed and steering angle parameters, perhaps even yaw angle among others.

[vhatever]

The best evidence it didn't exist? From YOUR link:

"Analysis of this software, which had been used at the San Marino Grand Prix, revealed that it included a facility called "launch control". This is a system which, when armed, allows the driver to initiate a start with a single action. The system will control the clutch, gear shift and engine speed fully automatically to a predetermined pattern.Benetton stated that this system is used only during testing. Benetton further stated that "it (the system) can only be switched on by recompilation of the code". This means recompilation of the source code. Detailed analysis by the LDRA experts of this complex code revealed that this statement was untrue. "Launch control" could in fact be switched on using a lap-top personal computer (PC) connected to the gearbox control unit (GCU).
When confronted with this information, the Benetton representatives conceded that it was possible to switch on the "launch control" using a lap-top PC but indicated that the availability of this feature of the software came as a surprise to them."

"In the circumstances, I am not satisfied in accordance with Article 2.6 of the Formula One Technical Regulations that car number 5 (M.Schumacher) complied with the Regulations at all times during the San Marino Grand Prix and I therefore submit this matter to the World Council for their consideration.
Charlie Whiting FIA Formula One Technical Delegate"


If you want to prove a case, don't link something that disproves it. They had onboard systems that were illegal. I'm not sure where your comments on Lewis come from, but being you are close minded and apparently don't deal with facts, you making assumptions doesn't shock me at all.

But please, continue with your kid stuff insults. People take you more seriously when you resort to not dealing with facts. :laugh:


LOl. I guess the whole "best evidence is it had not been used" is a little too complicated English for you. No basic physics, no basic English. Not too surprising. probably par for the course for lewy fanboys.

[Zico]

It is a little difficult to get your head around , but the coefficient of friction is more when the tyre is moving slightly across the surface , than when it is not .
So your drag racing factor is correct , even if a car had a TCS which was 100% accurate up until the wheel spun , it would not be able to accelerate as fast as one which could just the right amount of spin .So a competition TCS would be set for just the right amount of spin .
Not that I am saying that they are being used in F1 of course .


Spot on...

Interesting read on the Racelogic system here...



The system works by monitoring the speed of all four wheels using the ABS system or specially fitted sensors. When wheelspin is detected the engine power is reduced, by cutting a single injector pulse or a spark, until grip is resumed. This occurs in a thousandth of a second, and appears to the driver as a slight miss-fire with no loss in acceleration.

Maximum acceleration is achieved by limiting the slip between the tyre and the road. The point at which a tyre is just beginning to slip against the road gives the maximum coefficient of friction value.


Graph showing friction vs percent wheel slip

From the graph above it can be seen the maximum coefficient of friction (µ) occurs at a slip between tyre and road of 10% when dry, and around 5% when wet.

Maintaining this level of slip is inherently difficult, as the grip levels drop off significantly above these levels, meaning the balance between too much wheelspin and not enough power is very fine.

To drive the car and search for these levels of slip is very difficult, the moment the wheels start spinning too much (and how do you feel what is too much?) the power has to be reduced (by what amount?).

Top rally drivers have a good feeling for this limit, but they still tend to stay on the side of caution, and modulate the wheelspin between 10-20%, as this will still achieve 90% of the available traction. The closer to 5 or 10% slip, the higher the chance of reducing the power too much, and hindering acceleration, but also the closer you are to using 100% of the available traction.

The main reason for this is the response time of a human being. The fastest human reaction to a sense stimulus is 1/10th of a second, and the fastest acting throttle reacts in around the same time. This means there is a 2/10ths of a second lag between the wheel reaching a critical slip level, and the driver being able to change the amount of power being applied. This is why really good drivers tend to drive between 10 and 20% slip, to give a margin of safety should the tyres suddenly find a little more grip, causing the wheel to stop spinning completely.

Less experienced drivers will tend to allow 20-30% or more slip, again to maintain wheelspin rather then let the car 'bog' down, thus limiting their grip levels to around 85% of their maximum.

With the advent of fast reacting electronics on cars, this problem has been tackled with Traction Control systems. In race cars, Traction Control Systems have two functions, number one is to maintain the precise level of slip that will give close to 100% of the available grip, and number two is to maintain stable cornering. These two functions are linked, but require slightly different approaches.

The speed of reaction of a race Traction Control System is critical in maintaining a precise level of slip. The electronics themselves can react within a thousandth of a second, but to remain effective the engine power has to be quickly, and precisely controlled.

In road cars Traction Control normally relies on two methods of reducing the speed of the spinning wheel, brake application and throttle intervention. Brake application is a very effective and quick way of reducing the speed of a spinning wheel (almost unusable in a race situation - more later) but the accompanying throttle intervention is mechanically slow, and will also only reduce the airflow, which takes some time to become effective. On a road car the Traction Control System plays a third role, one of safety, in this role the level of slip is reduced to zero, and held there. This results in a very stable car, but one which will not accelerate at it's maximum potential at all times.

Race Traction Control Systems rely on much more precise, and faster acting ways of reducing power. The first method is shutting off fuel to the engine, and the other is cutting out the spark. Both methods have exactly the same high speed modulation ability, but the spark cutting system will happen potentially one cycle earlier. The magnitude of difference in reaction times between spark cut and fuel cut is negligible compared with the difference between throttle actuation and spark/fuel cut. (See fuel cut and spark cut below)

The Traction Control System then comes down to the interaction between the information from the wheel speed sensors and the level of power reduction applied. A good system would be capable of maintaining a level of slip that is adjustable depending on conditions.

Many factors affect the ideal level of slip, wet / dry conditions, speed of the vehicle, lateral g-force (cornering), tyre compound, tyre pressures etc. Ideally the driver should be able to dial in a base level of slip that takes into account weather and tyres, and the system should adjust automatically for speed of the vehicle and lateral g-force.

When cornering, the system should reduce the amount of slip available, to prevent lateral slip from occurring, and vary this amount depending on the speed of the vehicle. At high speed, low grip situations, this slip should be around 1-2% to maintain forward momentum, and at low speed high grip situations, this can be much higher.


Traction Control (http://www.albi-engineering.nl/Electronics/Traction_Control/body_traction_control.html)

[kfzmeister]

Cracks me up how everyone turned into a physicist on here with all this traction control logic.
My brain is smoking trying to keep up with you guys. Lmao.

Funny thing is that only a handful of F1 tweets barely commented on this RB traction control issue.

Unfortunately i think there's nothing to the actual claim.

.......and unlike a conventional ABS system and TC, i don't pretend to know how it works. :D

[driveace]

Never say it cannot be happening !
These guys are trying to beat the other competitors and the scrutineers too !
They all cheat as much as they can get away with !
AND i recon in Adrian Neway RB have the smartest cleverest guy in F1

[airshifter]

It is a little difficult to get your head around , but the coefficient of friction is more when the tyre is moving slightly across the surface , than when it is not .
So your drag racing factor is correct , even if a car had a TCS which was 100% accurate up until the wheel spun , it would not be able to accelerate as fast as one which could just the right amount of spin .So a competition TCS would be set for just the right amount of spin .
Not that I am saying that they are being used in F1 of course .

I think we are saying the same thing, though my choice of wording wasn't really appropriate. I stated you have to break traction in the sense of wheelspin. What I was referring to as 100% traction would be more appropriately worded as maximum tractive force. In either case it requires some wheel slip or spin, that I agree with.



Not that I think Red Bull have used TC, but a valid discussion for the topic IMO.

[airshifter]

LOl. I guess the whole "best evidence is it had not been used" is a little too complicated English for you. No basic physics, no basic English. Not too surprising. probably par for the course for lewy fanboys.

Rather than continue to troll, quote and highlight where the evidence is in your link. I see no evidence other than the fact that the team was proven to have lied. I didn't claim there was evidence the TC or traction control was used. If you feel I have quote me.

The best evidence that neither TC or launch control was used would have been an investigation that proved neither was present in the software. As we well know that didn't take place.

And I certainly hope your lame attempts at insults don't bother me... I'd be more than willing to test English or physics skills against yourself, or for that matter IQ. By all means, please troll on.

[vhatever]

Rather than continue to troll, quote and highlight where the evidence is in your link. I see no evidence other than the fact that the team was proven to have lied. I didn't claim there was evidence the TC or traction control was used. If you feel I have quote me.

The best evidence that neither TC or launch control was used would have been an investigation that proved neither was present in the software. As we well know that didn't take place.

And I certainly hope your lame attempts at insults don't bother me... I'd be more than willing to test English or physics skills against yourself, or for that matter IQ. By all means, please troll on.

The evidence -- all data from the race and source code from the cars. They didn't hire some dude like you off the internet as an "expert" to exaine the data. And they concluded the best evidence was that the launch control had never been used in that GP. You can believe whatever ignorant, bigoted nonsense you want. Just don't post them on a message board with people far more intelligent/knowledgeable and not hope to get lit up. It doesn't matter even if they ever used the launch control, it was ONLY launch control software they found, not traction control they were looking for. Nothing was found. Good, god dude. The easter bunny and santa clause are fake , too. You need me to go over those as well?

[dj_bytedisaster]

The evidence -- all data from the race and source code from the cars. They didn't hire some dude like you off the internet as an "expert" to exaine the data. And they concluded the best evidence was that the launch control had never been used in that GP. You can believe whatever ignorant, bigoted nonsense you want. Just don't post them on a message board with people far more intelligent/knowledgeable and not hope to get lit up. It doesn't matter even if they ever used the launch control, it was ONLY launch control software they found, not traction control they were looking for. Nothing was found. Good, god dude. The easter bunny and santa clause are fake , too. You need me to go over those as well?

You're beginning to annoy the raw crap out of me, man. Can you answer just ONE EFFING POST without trying to get some nasty digs in at the people you disagree with?

[airshifter]

The evidence -- all data from the race and source code from the cars. They didn't hire some dude like you off the internet as an "expert" to exaine the data. And they concluded the best evidence was that the launch control had never been used in that GP. You can believe whatever ignorant, bigoted nonsense you want. Just don't post them on a message board with people far more intelligent/knowledgeable and not hope to get lit up. It doesn't matter even if they ever used the launch control, it was ONLY launch control software they found, not traction control they were looking for. Nothing was found. Good, god dude. The easter bunny and santa clause are fake , too. You need me to go over those as well?

So I take it you didn't understand the point I made of quoting where the source states what you are claiming? :laugh:

Here.... I'll show you how easy it is.


Rather than continue to troll, quote and highlight where the evidence is in your link. I see no evidence other than the fact that the team was proven to have lied. I didn't claim there was evidence the TC or traction control was used. If you feel I have quote me.

[airshifter]

You're beginning to annoy the raw crap out of me, man. Can you answer just ONE EFFING POST without trying to get some nasty digs in at the people you disagree with?

Don't let it get under your skin DJ. When people engage in debate and don't have facts to support them, they often result to insults. It's similar to reasoning kids punch each other when they don't get their way.

I personally think it's comical when people get their blood pressure up over an internet forum. If they had a case, they usually have no need to get their blood pressure up. :)

[SGWilko]

bigoted

It IS you Tamb - that was always the 'phrase that pays' for you.

Just waiting on a suitable rant from you to keep us all entertained and maybe the odd foul mouthed PM too.......

;)

[henners88]

The evidence -- all data from the race and source code from the cars. They didn't hire some dude like you off the internet as an "expert" to exaine the data. And they concluded the best evidence was that the launch control had never been used in that GP.
Paul Tracy made a revelation some years ago that the same electronics in his IndyCar were used in the Benetton F1 car. He also tested for Benetton in 1994 and reckoned the launch control system was accessible by a gear shift combination on the parade lap. There was also the accusation that the memory on the CPU was reset once the car was switched off in parc ferme, hence why it would be hard to prove a system had been used. Jos Verstappen has also made suggestions but most likely to gain publicity. There is no easy way to prove it and to be honest disproving it is just as hard all these years on. All we know is it was present in the software and could have been accessed, but the team said they didn't. Luckily Flavio has such a great reputation for be honest and transparent, this sort of thing can no longer be questioned or discussed.

[SGWilko]

Surely, the point is, if TC/LC is banned, why was it in the software?

[henners88]

Surely, the point is, if TC/LC is banned, why was it in the software?
I think they said it was for testing purposes, but why test a banned driver aid? I know Piquet Jr was nowhere near it so we can only take the TP at his word on this one. :p

[dj_bytedisaster]

Surely, the point is, if TC/LC is banned, why was it in the software?

Very simple. Everybody, who has ever done any hardware programming, will tell you that touching something that runs is prohibitive. Programming an ECU is a job for someone, who killed mommy and daddy. Just remember how many problems McLaren's new ECU caused last year. Such things are ultra-complex and therefore prone to bugs, so if you have something that works - don't touch it. I'm pretty sure Benetton weren't the only team, who still had the 93 TC/LC routines in the software. The question is - who withstood the temptation to use it. For all we know, Benetton didn't.

[vhatever]

I think they said it was for testing purposes, but why test a banned driver aid? I know Piquet Jr was nowhere near it so we can only take the TP at his word on this one. :p

1. wouldn't actually need to have one of your main drivers test take offs/starts.
2. could assay the maximal performance possible as a driver benchmark.

reallly????

[RedBullian1]

Wasn't there a report last year that they may have been using illegal devices on the rear exhaust systems? That stuff went away within a week or so after it was reported.