Ducati goings on. Part 2.

[Japhrodisiac]

The new bike looks to have a shorter wheelbase, higher engine placement too (going by the starter hole). The rear cylinder head mount is now noticeably rearward of the swingarm pivot point and higher up.
Frame looks lovely. Nice job FTR

[Kropotkin]

Look at the exhausts too. A real tell-tale...

[Japhrodisiac]

Look at the exhausts too. A real tell-tale...

You mean the curved rear outlet pipe being so close to the rear fender? Exhaust routing quite a bit different. Good spot David

[tom]

Anyone else notice how circular this thread is....

Look, engineering is always a compromise and with racing you try and find the best solution under a given set of rules. Ducati chose to build a bike with a very strong engine and chose to capitalize on that by building a bike which favors traction at the rear to capitalize on drive out of the corners instead of corner entry. Based on what i have read I suspect their CoG is low and forward which tends to suit drive. What I think they need is to move it back and up to generate a bit of fore-aft pitch which will work the tires more by generating weight transfer. I think by now it is obvious that Ducati's problems (aside from the tires) do not stem from one particular part, but rather the sum of those parts. The bike they chose to build is simply not the best solution under the set of rules. There is nothing wrong with anything they have done so far from a technical perspective, but under the constraints of the current rules it simply was the wrong choice.

...move the engine back and up? Where have I seen that before?

Ok how funny (or not funny) is it going to be if this thing is a weapon and the conclusion to this thread is that the only thing wrong with the bike was from the beginning, was a simple moving of the centre of gravity! not the CF, not the frames design, not harmonics, not the angle of the V, not the stiff box front frame, etc, etc...

[Oscar]

Ok how funny (or not funny) is it going to be if this thing is a weapon and the conclusion to this thread is that the only thing wrong with the bike was from the beginning, was a simple moving of the centre of gravity! not the CF, not the frames design, not harmonics, not the angle of the V, not the stiff box front frame, etc, etc...

A significantly different BS carcass will radically alter the harmonics being fed into the frame, so the result of these tests isn't going to validate / invalidate some of the theories that have been put forward - but if the things are seriously more competitive than they were last year then I'd join with the 'c/g was the basic problem' brigade. Stoner has been hinting at using less rear-wheel steering on the new bike that's reputedly much the same as the old bike in general design philosophy, so if we see him using Lorenzo-type lines then I'd suggest that the tyres are in fact significantly different and likely far better matched to a bike that is looking for answers.

[RatsMC]

Ok how funny (or not funny) is it going to be if this thing is a weapon and the conclusion to this thread is that the only thing wrong with the bike was from the beginning, was a simple moving of the centre of gravity! not the CF, not the frames design, not harmonics, not the angle of the V, not the stiff box front frame, etc, etc...

Then I'd claim I was right all along

A significantly different BS carcass will radically alter the harmonics being fed into the frame, so the result of these tests isn't going to validate / invalidate some of the theories that have been put forward...

I'd still claim I was right and ignore your silly logical exclusions.


Seriously though, I didn't claim the c/g as the source of the problem, I simply ruled out, in my own mind, all of the other factors put forward: CF, Frame design, v angle.

[Oscar]

I'd still claim I was right and ignore your silly logical exclusions.

Of course, if it's something as basic as changing from a rotary to an oscillating renubriator valve, we're all going to look a bit silly.

[RatsMC]

I actually can't claim that I support any theory except that I didn't believe there was any reason to doubt the concept behind the GP11. There was something in the execution that wasn't working (such as the engine placement). However, since the components have all change so much since the GP11, there is no way to know if my belief in the concept was justified - unless they go back to it in the very near future which I can't see happening.

[motor]

As per Alex Briggs, the bike is left un-painted because the design is yet to be finalized.

"The bike is carbon & aluminium atm just for testing. It will be painted up when the design gets more finalized"

With due respect, I find it amusing how a lot of people confuse between a factory engineering/design teams' job and a development rider's / crew chief's job. The latter's job is just beginning, the former's job may not be finished, and neither can do the other's job.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/97206

PS: this is in context of an off-topic discussion that happened elsewhere

[RatsMC]

With due respect, I find it amusing how a lot of people confuse between a factory engineering/design teams' job and a development rider's / crew chief's job. The latter's job is just beginning, the former's job may not be finished, and neither can do the other's job.

I think this confusion only happens in the case of Rossi/Burgess. There are a lot of people who believe the myth that Rossi and JB built the Yamaha in 2004. I don't think the same confusion exists in the case of Lorenzo/Forcada or Stoner/Gabbarini.


Added: I AM NOT suggesting that anyone here believes that, just responding to motor's point.

[motor]

Agree.

[Japhrodisiac]

A significantly different BS carcass will radically alter the harmonics being fed into the frame, so the result of these tests isn't going to validate / invalidate some of the theories that have been put forward - but if the things are seriously more competitive than they were last year then I'd join with the 'c/g was the basic problem' brigade. Stoner has been hinting at using less rear-wheel steering on the new bike that's reputedly much the same as the old bike in general design philosophy, so if we see him using Lorenzo-type lines then I'd suggest that the tyres are in fact significantly different and likely far better matched to a bike that is looking for answers.

I don't understand the point re harmonics. Harmonics are a multiple or divisible of an original frequency. The deflection of a chassis on a racetrack are relatively random, ie as compression and rebound points relative to load from a bump or relatively slow g-load input at various angles, and the constant frequencies are mostly related to engine vibration. Unless what you refer to as harmonics really means feedback to the rider? That moment where the tire loads out and side slips rather than digging in?

The difference in BS carcass construction (ie a less stiff carcass) will play out in the fact that the tire carcass can flex more, thereby creating more heat in the tire and more feel - a softer setup generally will allow more feel, but too much chassis movement in some cases. The strange thing is, that all the teams are now developing chassis for an unknown variable - the 2012 tires. They are basically guessing that the 2012 BS versions will be X percent less stiff than the 2011 versions - but who knows what the new tires will really be like? Be prepared for radical changes as these round of bikes are based on guesses only.

[Oscar]

I don't understand the point re harmonics. Harmonics are a multiple or divisible of an original frequency. The deflection of a chassis on a racetrack are relatively random, ie as compression and rebound points relative to load from a bump or relatively slow g-load input at various angles, and the constant frequencies are mostly related to engine vibration. Unless what you refer to as harmonics really means feedback to the rider? That moment where the tire loads out and side slips rather than digging in?

I'm referring to harmonics of the carcass flex vs the frame ability to respond to (or absorb) the frequency of load/unload-cycle. Think of the bike as a 'system' whereby relatively small changes in grip-level are either absorbed into the system so that the entire system continues on a determined path, or is unable to absorb the changes and is therefore displaced from the path. IF the short front sub-frame - in whatever material - was unable to absorb what may have been in effect a very high-speed chatter then it is, I suggest, quite possible that the front tyre basically shook itself across the tarmac, washing out. The harder the tyre carcass, the more sharp-edged the input vibrations will be, but other factors will change the individual case (e.g. Stoner's unique riding style) so that if the critical frequency band is narrow but of decent amplitude, it will be extremely difficult to recognise as a consistent phenomena because the variables involved will be extremely difficult to isolate and replicate. It is also possible that if there was a particularly unfortunate concurrence of frame/tyre harmonic interaction, the situation could be self-exciting i.e. act as a multiplier to the effect.

I've also earlier postulated that the short, stiff front sub-frame could have been transmitting more of the 90-degree long-bang secondary imbalance as a shaking force to the tyre, but that's old ground. The new twin-beam frame should radically change all of that anyway!

[Cam D]

Lot's of back patting going on here... careful you boys don't put out a shoulder!

[Tourn46]

I think Ducati will be mightily pleased with that first session.

Ducati need some serious applause for doing what they have in such a short space of time. I know it's not top of the sheets, I know there's still probably more to come from the competition too - but I would suggest a brand new bike has the biggest margin of improvement to be found.

Considering the amount of doomsayers regarding the aluminium frame, etc... I think they've made a fab effort, well done Ducati.

[RatsMC]

It is too early to tell but I'm not sure. I was at first encouraged by the position but then I realized the Stoner wasn't there and Dovi is not in good shape which would likely push him back to 6th. If Simoncelli were there, I'd expect it would look just like their results during 2011.

Not happy about this at all but it is still early.

[boson]

Forget the position - it means nothing compared to last year. Last year we had no CRTs, Stoner out on track, Dovi on Repsol and of course #58 out on track. Gap to front is only representative thing regarding progress. In spite of that, forget times for today, first day with a bike that had only done shakedown laps in the hands of test riders!

The only thing that really matters is what the riders have to say about the new machine regarding how it feels. with good feeling comes confidence, and with confidence comes speed.

More info regarding weight distribution/engine positioning: No cylinder head poking through the radiator any more!

https://twitter.com/#!/M_Turco/status/1 ... 9673433089

[RatsMC]

The only thing that really matters is what the riders have to say about the new machine regarding how it feels. with good feeling comes confidence, and with confidence comes speed.

More info regarding weight distribution/engine positioning: No cylinder head poking through the radiator any more!

I actually posted a similar pic on the first page of the Sepang topic, along with some others for comparison. Seems they have definitely rolled the motor back.

As to what the riders have to say, I'm not sure we can expect any more truth from that than what we can glean from the times. All statements are going to be positive at this point. Really the only information that we are going to be able to put any faith in will be the times from Sepang 2.

[Cam D]

The strange thing is, that all the teams are now developing chassis for an unknown variable - the 2012 tires. They are basically guessing that the 2012 BS versions will be X percent less stiff than the 2011 versions - but who knows what the new tires will really be like? Be prepared for radical changes as these round of bikes are based on guesses only.

I thought they had already tried them?

“The first test everything went quite smoothly and as a first shakedown we couldn't have been happier,” recalled Stoner. “The next test at Brno we had the next evolution of tyres from Bridgestone, which created a few problems compared with the other tyres.

and
http://www.stayontheblack.com/sport/bri ... ogp-tests/

Tohru Ubukata – General Manager, Bridgestone Motorsport Tyre Development Department
“Though we achieved our key objectives and numerous lap records were broken in 2011, for the upcoming season we have focused our development on further enhancing the safety aspects of our MotoGP tyres.

“To achieve this target, our technical aim for the new specification tyres was to make their grip characteristics easier to manage, improve warm-up performance and increase their operating temperature range. The positive reception our new tyres received at the Valencia post-season test showed we are well on track with development, and we have continued our progress over the winter break.

“At Sepang we will introduce new specification tyres for testing, while for the Valencia test we will continue to evaluate the tyres we debuted there last November. Apart from examining performance data during the tests, we will work closely with Safety Advisor Loris Capirossi and the riders to gauge their perception of the new tyres. This is all part of our goal to ensure optimal tyre performance for all motorcycles on the grid in 2012.”

[L34]

Cam D, I believe there is an even "newer" front tyre made available today.
It has a softer carcass which allows for quicker heating.

[motor]

azi farni tweets:

@ValeYellow46 said that braking, entering and turning of bike improved a lot but still need to work on acceleration "new bike is beautiful"

[Cam D]

Cam D, I believe there is an even "newer" front tyre made available today.
It has a softer carcass which allows for quicker heating.

Comment from Jorge on the tyre behaviour - “It is much faster to warm-up the new tyres and you can slow down, then speed up again and the tyre stays good,” he said. “The other side is that it seems all the riders have this vibration [chatter].”

[Domino]

Smiling like a Cheshire Cat!

[Grahluk]

It is too early to tell but I'm not sure. I was at first encouraged by the position but then I realized the Stoner wasn't there and Dovi is not in good shape which would likely push him back to 6th. If Simoncelli were there, I'd expect it would look just like their results during 2011.

Not happy about this at all but it is still early.

A lot of "if's" there to cloud up what actually happened. 1st outing of contracted rider on 1st test day on completely new design and places top 7. It doesn't say a great deal about how much and how fast progress will come for them or the competition but if the Ducati was down in 12-14th this place would howl with the oracles of doom. Sounds like they're off to a respectable start. We'll see where it goes from there.

From the morning on track footage one thing is clear. Rossi's positioning and body language are markedly different from last year's test or even all season's racing. I know looking fast and being fast are not always the same thing but what I saw this morning looked more like what people maybe expected a year ago. Totally subjective opinion here but I'm feeling with half a clue on development direction and a healthy rider my prediction is they may have the season they were hoping for last year this year. 1/2 season to get near the front with the possibility of podiums or a win before it's all done.

[RatsMC]

I don't really disagree, I was just pointing out that it was a little early for Ducati to be patting themselves on the back as Tourn46 suggested they would be.