2022 cars 'porpoising' at high speed

[Fer.Fan]

Head of FIA must be Toto Wolff. MB needs help and mid seasong rule change is the fact. It was same last eyar, rear wings was changed for all teams efter Barcelona besause RedBull had good topspeed. The FIA and how they act, it is ridiculous.

[Big Tea]

I was wondering how it would be taken if the car was in limits for FP£ but out in qualli or the race.

It's straightforward. If you go over the vertical acceleration limits you get disqualifed, perhaps with a black flag shown during the session. Therefore you must err on the side of caution and allow plenty of margin!

It says-Teams must calculate the AOM for their car based on three laps in FP3, without using DRS.
Once the car's AOM has been determined, set-up decisions such as ride height, vertical stiffness and aerodynamic configurations will be locked in place for the remainder of the weekend.

So they have to start with things as they were in FP3 and there are variables which they may or may not know until the first few race laps.

[proteus]

Head of FIA must be Toto Wolff. MB needs help and mid seasong rule change is the fact. It was same last eyar, rear wings was changed for all teams efter Barcelona besause RedBull had good topspeed. The FIA and how they act, it is ridiculous.

Well we know that Mercedes and Ferrari are the ones which are porpoising most. The question is if others jump much less than the set value, than this means Merc and Ferrari will be the ones which will suffer mosty by this. If Mclaren, AT, AR, AM, Haas and Williams are in safe value, than Mercedes will be scrapping for points if they will even manage to get them at all. Their pledge for change might be them shooting themself in the knee.

[JordanMugen]

I was wondering how it would be taken if the car was in limits for FP£ but out in qualli or the race.

It's straightforward. If you go over the vertical acceleration limits you get disqualifed, perhaps with a black flag shown during the session. Therefore you must err on the side of caution and allow plenty of margin!

It says-Teams must calculate the AOM for their car based on three laps in FP3, without using DRS.
Once the car's AOM has been determined, set-up decisions such as ride height, vertical stiffness and aerodynamic configurations will be locked in place for the remainder of the weekend.

So they have to start with things as they were in FP3 and there are variables which they may or may not know until the first few race laps.

So like I said they have to err on the side of caution and allow plenty of safety margin (pun intended) in their car settings before porpoising starts to avoid disqualification, i.e., not run it on the limit of porpoising but rather set the ride height 10mm or 20mm above where porpoising starts.

If it is marginal for porpoising, and FIA mandates the extra 10mm from the technical directive, and then it still porpoises in the race then they will be disqualified which would be catastrophic. Hence it is the team's interest to not push compliance with the acceleration measurement to the limit but rather allow plenty of margin.

[johnny comelately]

What are we going to argue about when the porpoises are fixed?

[JordanMugen]

What are we going to argue about when the porpoises are fixed?

Nothing! Instead celebrating the excellent new ground effect regulations!

[Shrieker]

I have conflicting feelings about the latest from FIA.

On one hand, assuming changes / limits are expected from all teams, any requested change would be unfair towards Red Bull, who seem to have nailed their car in the new formula.

On the other, what happens if others close the performance gap and Red Bull too have to run their car even more marginally setup wise, and suddenly they start bouncing as well - maybe not as bad as the others, but certainly enough to cause issues to the drivers.

[henry]

I have conflicting feelings about the latest from FIA.

On one hand, assuming changes / limits are expected from all teams, any requested change would be unfair towards Red Bull, who seem to have nailed their car in the new formula.

On the other, what happens if others close the performance gap and Red Bull too have to run their car even more marginally setup wise, and suddenly they start bouncing as well - maybe not as bad as the others, but certainly enough to cause issues to the drivers.

Surely these changes are to the benefit of Red Bull. They have been running at the front of the field with much less of the bouncing phenomenon than their nearest competitor, Ferrari, and much much less than the next best, Mercedes. At least that’s what the armchair experts’ eyeball assessment is.

There’s a risk that they are experiencing unacceptable, to the FIA, vertical accelerations not obvious to the external observer, but I think that risk is low. Much will depend on the technical details of what the FIA decide is the measurement method and the limit criteria.

Maybe they’re closer to the ultimate performance than their competitors and they will, in the future, be caught and not have the option to “bounce” their way in front again. But for now I think they are in the driving seat.

[Big Mangalhit]

Surely these changes are to the benefit of Red Bull. They have been running at the front of the field with much less of the bouncing phenomenon than their nearest competitor, Ferrari, and much much less than the next best, Mercedes. At least that’s what the armchair experts’ eyeball assessment is.

But are we sure the RB as less vertical acceleration than the others? I think visual analysis is very tricky because of this:

The wave equation of vertical oscilations can be presented as: y=Acos(wt), with A=amplitude of the oscilation w=angular frequency.

In such a way the acceleration is the second derivative of position with respect to time so d^2y/dt^2)=w^2Acos(wt).

This means that the acceleration rises linearly with amplitude, and with the square of frequency.
so imagine (hypothetical) you have a RB with 4 times as much bouncing frequency than a Merc . Then the Merc can have 16 (4^2) times as much amplitude to have the same acceleration.

I don't know the exact values for the cars, my point is that the more visually pronounced bouncing that has high amplitude and relatively lower frequency (merc/Ferrari) can actually have lower vertical acceleration than one with lower amplitude but higher frequency (RB/AT). (I'm not saying this is happening, just that it could)

So is there any analysis done on this forum around the frequency and amplitudes of the bounces?

[mzso]

The band aid fix won't be a permanent solution..

It's a complete solution. If the teams are effectively forced to set up the car such that oscillations won't happen then the problem is obviously solved. People throw around "band-aid" for things they don't like...
If that results in some teams losing performance (Ferrari, Mercedes) then that's their problem...

[mzso]

Head of FIA must be Toto Wolff. MB needs help and mid seasong rule change is the fact. It was same last eyar, rear wings was changed for all teams efter Barcelona besause RedBull had good topspeed. The FIA and how they act, it is ridiculous.

This change will hinder Mercedes. Their car bounces the most, so they will need to drop the most performance.

[siskue2005]

The band aid fix won't be a permanent solution..

It's a complete solution. If the teams are effectively forced to set up the car such that oscillations won't happen then the problem is obviously solved. People throw around "band-aid" for things they don't like...
If that results in some teams losing performance (Ferrari, Mercedes) then that's their problem...

Have u seen Skyf1 video interview of James Allison, Brundle and even Horner... they are all against it. I was surprised how against this TD is redbull and Co. It looks like once the rules comes everyone's set up, suspension settings and engine modes would be made public...hence Horner is against it... JA had said u need those transparency otherwise they are also against the rule... looks like this TD will bring out the redbulls secrets..

[101FlyingDutchman]

The band aid fix won't be a permanent solution..

It's a complete solution. If the teams are effectively forced to set up the car such that oscillations won't happen then the problem is obviously solved. People throw around "band-aid" for things they don't like...
If that results in some teams losing performance (Ferrari, Mercedes) then that's their problem...

Have u seen Skyf1 video interview of James Allison, Brundle and even Horner... they are all against it. I was surprised how against this TD is redbull and Co. It looks like once the rules comes everyone's set up, suspension settings and engine modes would be made public...hence Horner is against it... JA had said u need those transparency otherwise they are also against the rule... looks like this TD will bring out the redbulls secrets..

JA said NOTHING of the sort in that interview. Stop making stuff up again to suit your narrative. It’s seriously getting boring

[DChemTech]

The band aid fix won't be a permanent solution..

It's a complete solution. If the teams are effectively forced to set up the car such that oscillations won't happen then the problem is obviously solved. People throw around "band-aid" for things they don't like...
If that results in some teams losing performance (Ferrari, Mercedes) then that's their problem...

Exactly. Height fixations are a band-aid. This is actually setting proper regs to avoid the problem happens in the first place. Much better.

[siskue2005]

It's a complete solution. If the teams are effectively forced to set up the car such that oscillations won't happen then the problem is obviously solved. People throw around "band-aid" for things they don't like...
If that results in some teams losing performance (Ferrari, Mercedes) then that's their problem...

Have u seen Skyf1 video interview of James Allison, Brundle and even Horner... they are all against it. I was surprised how against this TD is redbull and Co. It looks like once the rules comes everyone's set up, suspension settings and engine modes would be made public...hence Horner is against it... JA had said u need those transparency otherwise they are also against the rule... looks like this TD will bring out the redbulls secrets..

JA said NOTHING of the sort in that interview. Stop making stuff up again to suit your narrative. It’s seriously getting boring

James Allison on the TD

I think it's welcome that the FIA are recognizing that it's not a happy situation, where lap time and driver's health are in very sharp conflict with each other and i think as a sport it's really helpful if that's recognized and we try to tiptoe our way out of the sort of corner that the sport is wedged into at the moment.
And certainly we're very keen on working constructively with them, as will everyone else in the pitlane be, i have to say that the general approach of sort of saying we're gonna come up with a metric and then if you don't fall the right side of the metric we will impose upon you certain changes - that's a tricky way forwards.
And i think at a very minimum, if that were the way forward, then the metric that is derived would need to be very transparently communicated, the data on which it's based very transparently available and everyone's metric live, continuously and viewable by everyone i think would be a prerequisite, else you ... we're gonna wind up in a really horrid situation where we're told we must do something and we're looking at another car that's bouncing and we [say] "well what about them?" - "oh no their metric's fine" you know ... that would have to all be very much out in the open and i think a problematic way forward. The general direction of travel of saying "this is a problem, we need to fix it as a sport" extremely, extremely sensible and generally speaking the sport does tend to fix it's own problems in fairly short order




This is the only James Allison I know who said this.

Here is Horner




Edit: so someone has rated negatively for posting the actual things said in the video with the transcript, saying it zero facts... Nice going its only exposing yourself (have reported to mods, they r looking into it)