Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Hardware

Formula One Racing Just a Matter of Crunching the Numbers 377

Posted by michael from the ticket-to-ride dept.
Si24601 writes "Sauber Petronas Formula 1 team have launched Albert, their new supercomputer. With aerodynamics contributing a claimed 75% of the performance of the current bread of cars, Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) calculations have become increasingly important. Dalco's 530 AMD Opteron processor, 2.3 Tflop/s Supercomputer, with 1 TB RAM and 11 TB of storage, may just be up to the task." Other readers submitted links to stories on F1 Live and Formula1.com.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Formula One Racing Just a Matter of Crunching the Numbers More

Formula One Racing Just a Matter of Crunching the Numbers

Comments Filter:

  • bread (Score:2, Funny)

    by convolvatron ( 176505 )
    and without high performance bread, you may as well
    not enter the race

    • Re:bread (Score:3, Informative)

      by dbIII ( 701233 )
      and without high performance bread, you may as well not enter the race
      Strangely enough, there was a story in the "Yakitaki! Japan" Manga about a contest to bake the ultimate sports bread for Formula 1 drivers. (www.snoopycool.com for those interested). Yes, it's as silly as it sounds - a baking manga with elements borrowed from survivor, the LOTR movie and all kinds of places.
  • mmmmmmmmmmm....car bread, tastiest of all breads.


    • Sauber Petronas can launch whatever supercomputer they want, but if they can't get top gradeed drivers such as Michael Schumacher, they won't be able to be the #1 team for Formula One.

      Although computing power is extremely useful for the F1 race, it's the driver who makes the difference.

      How many times has Michael Schumacher turned the situation around, owning to his quick wit and his superb skill ?

      Unfortunately, also-run teams such as Sauber Petronas never learn the lesson. They kept thinking that techno
      • Sauber has Villeneuve on their team this year, and while he didn't exactly shine in the races he did last year, they have been at the top of the charts recently in testing. They are running Ferrari engines, and this year switched from Bridgestone to Michelin tires, which should help them where they've been hurting, which is qualifying and the beginning of their runs.

        Also, how would Sauber get good drivers if they didn't have the needed technology, like their new wind tunnel and supercomputer? At least now
        • To take any information from the numbers in testing right now is pointless. We won't know what teams have competent packages until Melbourne in March.
          • Actually, if this year was any indication, we probably won't know until June. Still, the results were promising, and show that Villeneuve can still drive a car at a good speed around the track at a time slightly faster than his teammate.
            • Well, you also have to consider JV will have more seat time at the start of next year than he did when he filled in at the end of this past season. There is no replacement for seat time in Formula 1. I think a lot of people were dissapointed with his results at the end of this past season, but I'm sure he'll do better this year (proportionally to how good his car is)

  • Wow (Score:2, Funny)

    by qw0ntum ( 831414 )
    Need for Speed 1000000 right there.

  • Bread of cars (Score:5, Funny)

    by MacDork ( 560499 ) on Friday December 10, 2004 @11:13PM (#11057867) Journal
    With aerodynamics contributing a claimed 75% of the performance of the current bread of cars

    The other 25% being due to lightweight wheat products apparently ;-)

    • Well modern F1 cars do use a lot of fibre in their construction, but I always thought it came from carbon filaments and not wheat products. Who knew?

    • bread statistics (Score:5, Funny)

      by Fishstick ( 150821 ) on Friday December 10, 2004 @11:25PM (#11057940) Journal
      75% !! bread is evil and must be stopped...

      I've done a little research, and what I've discovered should make anyone think twice....

      - More than 98 percent of convicted felons are bread users.

      - Fully HALF of all children who grow up in bread-consuming households score below average on standardized tests.

      - In the 18th century, when virtually all bread was baked in the home, the average life expectancy was less than 50 years; infant mortality rates were unacceptably high; many women died in childbirth; and diseases such as typhoid,yellow fever, and influenza ravaged whole nations.

      - More than 90 percent of violent crimes are committed within 24 hours of eating bread.

      - Bread is made from a substance called "dough." It has been proven that as little as one pound of dough can be used to suffocate a mouse. The average American eats more bread than that in one month!

      - Primitive tribal societies that have no bread exhibit a low incidence of cancer, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's disease, and osteoporosis.

      - Bread has been proven to be addictive. Subjects deprived of bread and given only water to eat begged for bread after as little as two days.

      - Bread is often a "gateway" food item, leading the user to "harder" items such as butter, jelly, peanut butter, and even cold cuts.

      - Bread has been proven to absorb water. Since the human body is more than 80 percent water, it follows that eating bread could lead to your body being taken over by this absorptive food product, turning you into a soggy, gooey bread-pudding person.

      - Newborn babies can choke on bread.

      - Bread is baked at temperatures as high as 400 degrees Fahrenheit! That kind of heat can kill an adult in less than one minute.

      - Most bread eaters are utterly unable to distinguish between significant scientific fact and meaningless statistical babbling.

      In light of these frightening statistics, we propose the following bread restrictions:

      - No sale of bread to minors.

      - A nationwide "Just Say No To Toast" campaign, complete with celebrity TV spots and bumper stickers.

      - A 300 percent federal tax on all bread to pay for all the societal ills we might associate with bread.

      - No animal or human images, nor any primary colors (which may appeal to children) may be used to promote bread usage.

      - The establishment of "Bread-free" zones around schools.

      http://www.obnoxiousfumes.com/archives/000376.html [obnoxiousfumes.com]
      • I've seen that before, and I think it's highly entertaining, but one thing about it has always bothered me...

        It has been proven that as little as one pound of dough can be used to suffocate a mouse.

        Are there studies on this? Would it really take a whole POUND of bread dough to suffocate a mouse? I think I could probably accomplish it with as little as a tablespoon with sufficient motivation and some thick gloves...

        Ah, the important questions in life.

        p
    • The competition is toast!
    • With rumors of the Atkins group looking at carbs in cellphones, this may be the best news that overweight americans get. Your car has too much carbs... WALK 5 miles a day.

  • Don't forget the drivers, too. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mOoZik ( 698544 ) on Friday December 10, 2004 @11:13PM (#11057869) Homepage
    Sure, technology is important in that sport, but don't discount the importance of world-class drivers like Schumacher, et al.

    • it's mostly the car. when valentino rossi gets within a second or two of schumacher on his initial outing [cnn.com] in a F1 car, it illustrates how the driver is not as important as he once was
      • Schumacher wouldn't be the world's best paid athlete if he didn't contribute whatever amount of importance to the process of winning. Consistently.

      • Why don't you hop in an F1 car and take on Schumacher. The driver is still very important.
        • you cant win in F1 without a top notch car. if Schumacher was in a BAR Honda and Barichello was driving the Ferrari would Schumi be dominating the series? the car is the biggest factor in F1 not the driver.
          • If a driver crashed every race he would never win no matter how good the car is. Like it or not, both the car and driver are important.
            • we're not talking about drivers who crash every race. we're talking about F1 level drivers most of which have some semblance of competency in F1 cars. throw a good driver in the fastest car and he will win more often than not. was Jacques Villeneuve not a World Champion? how many podium finishes did he have when he was driving an inferior car?
              • Ohhh... I see, you have to have good drivers. You can't just throw anyone off the street in the fastest car and expect him to win every time? Huh, sounds like the drivers are also important.

                A good car will make a good driver look even better. On the other hand a good car won't do a damn thing for a bad driver other than make him crash faster.
                • One other point: The cars get quicker because they are tested and refined to suit their drivers. Without good technical feedback from the drivers (both test and race), the car will not improve as quickly. Car AND Driver both need to be good, and an enormous budget doesn't hurt, either.
      • Valentino Rossi has never made an F1 start. Thats entirely diferent from a test driving without competitors.

        I sure hope he gets his shot though.
      • In F1 a second is a week. The gap from first to last on a qualifying lap will be no more than 2 or 3 seconds typically. The top 10 may well be within 0.5 seconds.
      • Back in 1994, Schumacher came second in Barcelona with his car stuck in fifth gear [michaelschumacher-f1.com] for three quarters of the race.

        Undoubtably cars have improved since then, but it's a good indication of the difference a great driver can make. It doesn't matter how fast the car is, you've still got to take the right path around the corner to exit it as fast as possible.

      • Yes, but within a second doesn't mean much. Lets see how long it takes him to make up that extra second, and not only that, but do it consistantly over the course of an entire season.
    • ..AND the food they eat. The article mentions bread in particular.
    • If you put Schumacher in a perfect two-year old car and the rest of the field in current cars, I doubt he'd manage a win a single race. The cars improve enough each season that you must have both the car and the driver. Just the driver alone will not win races. It would be able to showcase what you can do with the old technology, getting you sponsors able to afford the new tech, but not win.
    • Sauber has hired Jacques Villeneuve, the only driver racing who has beaten Schumacher to the World Championship.

      Although Sauber and Villeneuve have had less-than-spectacular results recently, there's always a chance that they could collectively get their acts together and be very competitive.
      • Mr. Newtown is an extremely over-paid playboy. Or atleast he was at BAR. Now he's just a moderately over-paid playboy. For him to be good he needs a fantastic car (like the Williams he used to drive) and a fantastic team (like the Williams people who used to be behind him). Mssrs Button and Sato have shown him up as a pretender at BAR.
    • Et al? What others? Where are they?

  • Still a sport? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Octagon Most ( 522688 ) on Friday December 10, 2004 @11:16PM (#11057886)
    I imagine that at some time we will approach the level of technological sophistication where we no longer call some competitive event a sport. That is to say, at some point the human element will contribute a trivial amount to the overall performance. I am not saying that F1 racing is at or near that point - I have tremendous respect for the athletes that drive those cars under extreme conditions. But imagine a technologically advanced version of something like dogsledding, where the human is along for the ride. Do we continue to call it a sport? Or does it become some other type of contest?
    • Most types of racing outlaw computer assistance, including traction control and ABS. As long as this is true, racing is sport. When you start letting the computer drive, it's not a sport any more.
    • Hell yes. Robot wars is a sport! No, wait, what was the question? Seriously I think it's still a sport at the level you talk about. Only difference is that the competitors are the engineers rather than drivers.
    • This reminds me of Jetsons. I remember watching an episode that had robots playing football when I was a kid. Didn't understand it then, but I understand it now. Sports are all about generating revenue and hype. Look at the Super Bowl halftime. Nobody watches it for the game, it's all about the glitz. The comedian Lewis Black did a very funny and insightful review of the last halftime on his "End of the Universe" album
    • I think the opposite is true. While technology is creating cars that are capable of driving faster, it makes no difference if your driver is no good. Also, when you hear about these kinds of advances, they're talking about shaving a fraction of a second off of a lap, or maybe a few seconds off of a race that could be hours long. In order to take advantage of such a miniscule technological advantage, your driver had better be near-perfect.

      Now, when they start having a computer decide how much to accele

    • Always a Sport (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ACNeal ( 595975 )
      What you fail to realize is that this technology is available to everyone. Even if i have a technological advantage for a short period of time, my car driver, sled driver, swimmer, runner, or whatever still have to perform with the new equipment or training techniques.

      Then, when everyone else has the same technology, it falls back solely on the shoulders of the competitors. Sure technology has them going 100% faster, but everyone is going the same 100% faster. And the new breed of competitor has to be b

  • So much of it comes down to science. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Sheetrock ( 152993 ) on Friday December 10, 2004 @11:18PM (#11057894) Homepage Journal
    It's almost scary that they leave the human element in there at all when you think about the amount of money they sink into these cars. Granted, win or lose you've got a ton of sponsors, but it's very nearly to the point where they might as well do everything with robots.

    From complex wind shear modelling to the amount of flour to throw in the composite, almost all of the attention is paid to the machine -- it makes me wonder if they're shaving less time off the total than if they put this kind of focus on the driver (proper diet, reflexive training, etc.) Gran Turismo 3 demonstrates quite well the types of skills necessary to take on the track.

    • Uh, dude, at this level of racing the drivers are already masters of the skills of the trade. That's what developmental leagues (NASCAR truck, regional driving leagues, etc.) are for; to become a good racer with vehicles that aren't quite so meticulously tuned. Every F1 or NASCAR racer out there has been driving cars very fast for at least 10 years. You don't just hop in to a Formula 1 car and drive; I honestly doubt most of us would be able to operate an F1 car at all. You have to keep the engine revved ab
      • They have to regulate fuel/air mixture SINCE WHEN? These things have been controlled by computer for a LONG time.

        Idle on the BMW P83 is 4500 R.P.M. which is also CONTROLLED BY COMPUTER. Too cold and die? You REALLY think this?

      • I think most cars even have anti-stall technology these days. Basic operation of an F1 car would quite simple.

        The problem most of us would face would be avoiding shitting ourselves when we put our foot on the loud pedal.

        Of course, you need to be highly skilled to be even vaguely competative in one.
      • I don't know what era F1 car you are talking about, but driving a modern F1 car isn't that hard. F1 is NOT the same as NASCAR.

        After all you just keep going round the same track over and over, there's semi auto transmission, tons of computers taking care of stuff. Give a decent driver some coaching and an hour or so and I think he/she could get the hang of driving it fast.

        Do a search for "Alex Yoong" and F1. Driving it fast _enough_ is the hard part, as Alex Yoong found out.

        In contrast driving in a rally
      • I think this says that most of the drivers have reached a skill level where the only deciding factor in a race is the car.

        Perhaps.

        But that doesn't explain Valentino Rossi's success on two wheels, seemingly independent of manufacturer.

        I suspect if Schuey were tossed into a competitor's ride, he'd *still* run away with the title. After all, Barrichello is driving essentially the exact same car, yet he doesn't win even half the races Schuey does. Nor would most other drivers in F1, if given the opportunit
    • Gran Turismo 3 demonstrates quite well the types of skills necessary to take on the track.

      Spoken like a true Slashdork. If you didn't learn it from a video game, it's not worth knowing...
      • Agreed. Thinking a few hours behind a DualShock and a copy of GT3 puts you at the same level as the Schummachers, Truli, Alonso, Montoya, Rikkonen, or Barrichelo is just pure hubris.
        • True, but it does make you appreciate it a whole lot more. Watching a race is a whole lot more enjoyable after a season of F1 Career Challenge. Set it for full damage and semi-automatic transmission(with a Logitech wheel) and you'll get an inkling how much goes into driving an F1 car. That doesn't include the G-forces or what it feels like to hit the wall at 300kph.
    • Gran Turismo 3 demonstrates quite well the types of skills necessary to take on the track.

      You mean the same game where a Cooper Mini can slip and slide slide while going around a *gentle* paved, dry curve going only 45mph?

      Car racing games are more cartoon physics than gamers let on.
    • Do you have any idea? We're talking F1 here, not Indycar. Nigel Mansel went to Indycar as the world champion and beat the pants of everybody. After just one year in Indycar he was too fat to fit in an F1 car and too unfit to race F1 at all. F1 is extremely demanding of the drivers.

  • Shape of tires (Score:3, Funny)

    by marol ( 734015 ) on Friday December 10, 2004 @11:22PM (#11057923)
    From the red areas in the images you can clearly see that round tires are inefficient. I propose shaping them oval as a step in optimizing the aerodynamics.
    • Shimano tried that with the bicycle. There was a chainring called the "bio ring" or something of that nature. It was thought to provide more efficient pedaling with each downstroke but cyclists know the efficiency is in the clipless pedals and "spinning".
      • Actually it was called BioPace. The point of it was most cyclists don't have a fluid pedal stroke where even power is transmitted through the entire pedal stroke. Most cyclists have a flat spot in their pedal form, and the oval ring helped with the flat spot. The problem was too many cyclists developed knee problems because of the oval ring.
  • The Williams team also uses a scupercomputer to do a lot of their modelling, thanks to one of their major sponsors HP and a Linux supercomputer [hp.com].

  • Too much tech? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Tom Bombadill ( 17942 )
    On Fifth Gear recently (11/22) Jackie Stewart was saying that Schumacher makes more mistakes every Gran Prix weekend than any GP racer he has ever know.

    Reliance on tech, whether track data or ASR and ABS in race cars has arguably reduced the ultimate skill levels demanded of racing's elite.

    • Re:Too much tech? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Moofie ( 22272 )
      OK, so what happens to your argument when I tell you that ABS and stability management (I assume that's what you're talking about when you say ASR) are banned in F1 racing?

    • Re:Too much tech? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by PHPhD2B ( 675590 )
      Of course, he can say that knowing full well he'll never be put in a new F1 car to put his mouth where his money is. Did occur to anybody Jackie Stewart might be a bit JEALOUS of Michael Schumacher's accomplishments?
    • No offense to Jackie Stewart, but that statement - if true - shows what a moron he is. Schumacher is the best of the best: period. He is not the best because he drives the best car. Before F1, he was also the best in his respective type of racing. To make such sweeping statements about the best paid athlete - and arguably the best driver on the face of this earth - is moronic, at best.

    • Re:Too much tech? (Score:5, Informative)

      by WolfWithoutAClause ( 162946 ) on Saturday December 11, 2004 @12:22AM (#11058167) Homepage
      No. He said something more along the lines of:

      Schumacher makes more mistakes in a Grand Prix weekend than anyone of my generation in their entire careers.

      Of course they were driving their cars a lot 'slower', partly because the cars went more slowly, but mostly because if it left the track, you were highly likely to die- they weren't even wearing seatbelts. F1 driver life expectancy was about 3 or 4 years in those days.

      Personally, I think Jackie was exagerating for effect, but he had a point.

    • Re:Too much tech? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by the pickle ( 261584 )
      You've lost the important point...

      Schuey still makes fewer mistakes than his competitors.

      That's why he's on top of the podium every damn weekend, and they aren't.

      It also proves that driver skill, not simply the engineering department at the manufacturer, is the ultimate and deciding factor in F1, just as it's (almost) always been.

      p
    • I think the point JYS was actually making was that drivers of today make far more mistakes than those in his day. I've no doubt this is true - in the days JYS was racing several drivers died every year, a mistake would often cost you your life. Cars then were a hell of a lot more 'twitchy' than now.
      In modern F1 drivers can *afford* to make more mistakes - partly because of technology like traction control (ABS has been outlawed in F1 since the Prost bore-fest that was 1993), but mainly because one can aff

  • Multiplication? (Score:3, Funny)

    by MP3Chuck ( 652277 ) on Friday December 10, 2004 @11:51PM (#11058042) Homepage Journal
    From TFA: "To achieve the same computing performance, the entire population of the city of Zurich would have to multiply two eight-digit figures every four seconds for a whole year."

    Does anyone have a conversion from "multiplying two eight-digit numbers" to "reading through a Library of Congress?"

  • Fluid dynamics problems have been finally solved by a bunch of overpaid mechanics that work on F1 cars with high technology monitoring equipment.

    I'm sure that this research relates directly to the mileage of my Hemi.
  • If all the engineering energy that goes into NASCAR suddenly went into rockets -- we'd be the last generation bound to the earth.
  • Best damned sport out there if you ask me. GO SATO!!
  • Heard at the White House earlier today:

    "Oh no! We're about to lose a whole group of voters when the Nascar dads hear about this..."

Slashdot Top Deals

Intel CPUs are not defective, they just act that way. -- Henry Spencer

Close