FIA set to ban FRIC suspension from Hockenheim...?

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

Limiting performance parameters will make limits to the fuel consumption unnecessary though.

Because of the complexities of measuring downforce on a moving car, I think it's just easier to limit their fuel and let them go at it. Downforce causes drag, and if you control fuel, downforce becomes self-limiting.

Plus, it aligns the design brief for a racing car closer to the design brief for a passenger car, where most people care about fuel consumption.

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by davyboy

Give them 3 gallons of whatever's available on a forecourt pump and let them at it.

I like it!

[P38 in workshop]

Keep FRIC systems and allow active from 2016.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by P38 in workshop

Keep FRIC systems and allow active from 2016.

A news item somewhere talked of something like this. I had speculated earlier as to "why" this has come up now. That maybe it is leverage for something. Maybe to get agreement on a cost controlled active suspension? I expect any change that allows active suspension will have a number of limits defined in the rules. Either spec parts, limits on specific components, or some combo of the above.

Richard

[wolfhound]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

A news item somewhere talked of something like this. I had speculated earlier as to "why" this has come up now. That maybe it is leverage for something. Maybe to get agreement on a cost controlled active suspension? I expect any change that allows active suspension will have a number of limits defined in the rules. Either spec parts, limits on specific components, or some combo of the above.

Richard

According to the FIA, cost was one of the factors in trying to ban FRIC systems.

They spotted that they could do it under the existing rules and obviously decided to go for it.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/114922

[P38 in workshop]

Maybe somebody should whine to the European Commission about the way in which the FIA operates.The ensuing scuffle might keep them from manipulating F1 for spurious reasons,or at the behest of vested interests.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by miatanut

Because of the complexities of measuring downforce on a moving car, I think it's just easier to limit their fuel and let them go at it. Downforce causes drag, and if you control fuel, downforce becomes self-limiting.

Plus, it aligns the design brief for a racing car closer to the design brief for a passenger car, where most people care about fuel consumption.

The banning of ground effects made the cars lose around two-thirds of their aerodynamic efficiency. Teams could also gain lot of efficiency by using movable aerodynamics including active suspension. With regulations allowing almost all sorts of technologies and only providing limits to the number of consumables, it is quite foreseeable teams will be able to create more than the current amount of downforce for only a small fraction of the current drag levels.

Downforce is already being measured by the teams themselves. I fail to see how the FIA cannot homologate measuring devices then, like they did with the fuel-flow sensors.

[JeremySmith]

I would like to see active suspension back on the cars, spec front and rear wings and dump DRS...

Adrian it's been a blast..

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

Downforce is already being measured by the teams themselves. I fail to see how the FIA cannot homologate measuring devices then, like they did with the fuel-flow sensors.

The problem is all the suspension geometries are a little different, so a given load at a load cell at the spring will mean different amounts of force on different cars. Then FIA has to understand the relationship between suspension angle and load multipliers at all points in the suspension travel and the team changes one thing, and the FIA data is then wrong. If you could somehow do it at the hub, that might work, but then you have a sensor getting the snot beat out of it, and changes in camber might also mess with what it reads relative to the true downforce.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

According to the FIA, cost was one of the factors in trying to ban FRIC systems.

They spotted that they could do it under the existing rules and obviously decided to go for it.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/114922

Sorry don't buy it!

There are more logic holes in this argument than words!

Clutching at straws to justify championship manipulation at Ferrari's behest!

You put in a protest and we'll ask about FRIC and you tell us that you use it for aerodynamic purposes and we'll ban it for you!

Why don't they just change the name from F1 to F LCD (Lowest common denominator)


Yes P38 I think this would be a very good idea:

"Maybe somebody should whine to the European Commission about the way in which the FIA operates.The ensuing scuffle might keep them from manipulating F1 for spurious reasons,or at the behest of vested interests."

[Casper]

Originally Posted by wnut

"Maybe somebody should whine to the European Commission about the way in which the FIA operates.The ensuing scuffle might keep them from manipulating F1 for spurious reasons,or at the behest of vested interests."

Anyone who is involved in F1, you, me, (as spectators) the team manager, the floor sweeper etc all have a vested interest and everyone of us knows exactly how to fix the category. Those with what I would call a primary vested interest only want one thing and that is to keep every other team under control so that their team keeps winning. Ferrari have generally been acknowledged as world champions when it comes to controlling other teams and most probably see it as their god given duty for all I know. What would be interesting is a bit of transparency and through that see what or who kicks off what are seemingly stupid and unfathomable decisions. Without some transparency it is likely to begin to alienate the spectator base and accelerate the decline in popularity that is already occurring. If the cars are illegal by the book then they should not be allowed to race until they are, simple really. If I present a car at scrutineering I am told no racing if they find something wrong.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Casper

Anyone who is involved in F1, you, me, (as spectators) the team manager, the floor sweeper etc all have a vested interest and everyone of us knows exactly how to fix the category. Those with what I would call a primary vested interest only want one thing and that is to keep every other team under control so that their team keeps winning. Ferrari have generally been acknowledged as world champions when it comes to controlling other teams and most probably see it as their god given duty for all I know. What would be interesting is a bit of transparency and through that see what or who kicks off what are seemingly stupid and unfathomable decisions. Without some transparency it is likely to begin to alienate the spectator base and accelerate the decline in popularity that is already occurring. If the cars are illegal by the book then they should not be allowed to race until they are, simple really. If I present a car at scrutineering I am told no racing if they find something wrong.

Agreed stop moving the goal posts...

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

According to the FIA, cost was one of the factors in trying to ban FRIC systems.

They spotted that they could do it under the existing rules and obviously decided to go for it.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/114922

From a team point of view it makes sense to announce the ban now, so team's don't have their 2015 designs compromised but I would have thought banning FRICS mid-season would add to costs, as the teams will have to alter their car's suspension, to meet the new regulations.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by miatanut

The problem is all the suspension geometries are a little different, so a given load at a load cell at the spring will mean different amounts of force on different cars. Then FIA has to understand the relationship between suspension angle and load multipliers at all points in the suspension travel and the team changes one thing, and the FIA data is then wrong. If you could somehow do it at the hub, that might work, but then you have a sensor getting the snot beat out of it, and changes in camber might also mess with what it reads relative to the true downforce.

Calibration would indeed be necessary, but is not more difficult than calibrating a fuel-flow sensor.

[chillibowl]

just a question as i havent seen anything to suggests that this is Ferrari trying to manipulate the championship (so wondering if i missed something)

i thought Ferrari would also be using this system, would have spent a considerable amount on it, and from what i have gathered its the smaller budget teams pushing the ban due to cost savings.

at this point dont Ferrari have more to fear from being overtaken in the standings by Force India then they do from being beaten by Merc?

[bjohnsonsmith]

McLaren intends to remove FRICS for Hockenheim.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/114963

I think this paragraph from this article is interesting.

''Without unanimous support, any team that ran with FRIC from the German GP risked being protested by any outfit that did not have it on its car."

[bjohnsonsmith]

Teams can't agree on unanimous ban.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/114969

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Teams can't agree on unanimous ban.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/114969

Given that McLaren will be without theirs, can we expect them to protest everyone on the grid that has retained FRIC this weekend ?

[P38 in workshop]

Originally Posted by davyboy

Given that McLaren will be without theirs, can we expect them to protest everyone on the grid that has retained FRIC this weekend ?

Shouldn't be any need for protesting if removing the system drags the others down to the level of the current McLaren.Those bold enough to stick with the system can be dealt with by the stewards in the event of any protests.Of course,just keeping quiet might be a good move too.

[321Go]

"McLaren does not currently intend to run a FRIC suspension system at the German Grand Prix"

Doesn't read like McLaren have confirmed they will not run FRIC to me.

[JamesH]

I'm still not sure how this form of suspension system, which simply links the front and rear suspension, can fall fowl of the rules on moveable aero. If FRIC does, they why not the entire suspension system? F1 suspension's entire purpose is the stabilise the aerodynamic surface that is the car bodyshell, plus a bit of keeping the tyres on the ground. Same as FRIC.

I don't see how they can distinguish between the two.

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by JamesH

I'm still not sure how this form of suspension system, which simply links the front and rear suspension, can fall fowl of the rules on moveable aero. If FRIC does, they why not the entire suspension system? F1 suspension's entire purpose is the stabilise the aerodynamic surface that is the car bodyshell, plus a bit of keeping the tyres on the ground. Same as FRIC.

I don't see how they can distinguish between the two.

When the front of the car dives during braking for a corner, the pitch of car will be at an angle, thus altering its aero chararcteristics... making it less efficient. Using FRIC, the rear of the car would be artificially lowered as a result of the front diving, to ensure the car remained horizontal. This would negate the inefficiency induced. So I guess they see this action as movable aero ?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by davyboy

When the front of the car dives during braking for a corner, the pitch of car will be at an angle, thus altering its aero chararcteristics... making it less efficient. Using FRIC, the rear of the car would be artificially lowered as a result of the front diving, to ensure the car remained horizontal. This would negate the inefficiency induced. So I guess they see this action as movable aero ?

FRIC, like active suspension, helps keeps the car level as it brakes, corners and accelrates but I don't see how it can be seen as moveable aero? The only moveable aero device on the car is the adjustable rear wing, that's part of DRS.

[wolfhound]

I can understand front to rear interconnection but this has been going on for over 20 years. The Jordan 191 had a mechanical front to rear connection that did something like what is being done now with hydraulics. If the car had suspension linked to say engine speed or certain gears that would be a different meaning to moveable aero device. Front to rear linked suspension also has an influence on weight distribution and hence brake balance. By banning FRIC it could mid season could have unforeseen consequences.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

I can understand front to rear interconnection but this has been going on for over 20 years. The Jordan 191 had a mechanical front to rear connection that did something like what is being done now with hydraulics. If the car had suspension linked to say engine speed or certain gears that would be a different meaning to moveable aero device. Front to rear linked suspension also has an influence on weight distribution and hence brake balance. By banning FRIC it could mid season could have unforeseen consequences.

One consequence, that can be forseen, is the redesigning and manufacturing of the cars suspension system, which is going to add to the overall cost, something I thought the FIA was trying to avoid.