- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
The FIA has officially confirmed that none of the 22 F1 cars present at Hockenheim for this weekend's German Grand Prix are fitted with a front to rear interlinked suspension system.
“We had new parts to take off because the FRIC system is under investigation and we thought we might as well try the car and see what we could do without it in case it goes that way,” the Briton later informed Sky Sports Online.
“We did lots of different set up changes and I think we learnt a lot.”
“It didn’t feel as bad as I thought,” he added. “It will depend on what circuit you are at. At Silverstone it didn’t seem to take a huge amount of balance away from the car and by the end of the day we kind of got it back to where it was so it was actually quite an encouraging sign.”
It will have an effect, some circuits it will have others not so much. In simulation it can be anything from seven tenths to maybe a couple of tenths, so you won’t really know until you get to the circuit and try it out, but it has its gains by not running it as well,” he revealed.
“It is mainly to do with the straight line speed and the type of corners because it moves depending on what speed you are doing to give you the optimum speed in a straight line, so I guess it will affect the higher speed circuits more than the slow speed.
“It has its gains as the car is lighter without it and you can run higher, which isn’t best for the downforce, but it is better for kerbs so if there is a particular circuit where you want to run wide over kerbs then this is better.”
1.: Of course there is a big difference between the air flowing round the car and fluids or gases that are clearly a part of the car. You can not really count the air round the car as a part of it...so I like the thought that the fluids are a part of the car and influence aero.beelsebob wrote:I don't buy that explanation either - if you count fluid in the car as a "specific part of the car influencing its aerodynamic performance" then you would also have to count the air flowing through the radiators as such a part too. Suddenly all aerodynamics are banned. More so, you would have to count the springs as having aerodynamic influence, and they are clearly not rigidly attached to the entirely sprung part of the car.Cam wrote:all fluids are just compressed air though?It's movable, it effects aero, it's in the FRIC suspension, plus, you can only imagine the advanced versions and what they're doing. Probably way off, but that's what I can think of. Don't think like an engineer, think like a lawyer.a substance that has no fixed shape and yields easily to external pressure; a gas or (especially) a liquid.
I still think there must be some part they can point to that they can say "this moves relative to the chassis".
Well Mclaren are saying the same....beelsebob wrote:Haha, Mercedes are already playing the game then. By saying "oh no no, it won't take anything away from us, that's not where the advantage lies" they hope to convince the FIA that this is not the droid they're looking for.
Jedi mind tricks all the way.
Where did you read the quotes from Mercedes?beelsebob wrote:Haha, Mercedes are already playing the game then. By saying "oh no no, it won't take anything away from us, that's not where the advantage lies" they hope to convince the FIA that this is not the droid they're looking for.
Jedi mind tricks all the way.
Andres125sx wrote:Bernie, please.... retire yourself...
You´re 83 years old....
Double points at last GP
No practice
Engines freeze
Banning tons of technologies that actually make some production cars a lot more advanced than F1
Going to India, Singapur, Abu Dhabi...
Thinking about sprinklers, trumpets, sparks mechanism
Not enough yet?
If your referring to n smikle's post......you'll find that the quote is from Marussia's Chilton!beelsebob wrote:Haha, Mercedes are already playing the game then. By saying "oh no no, it won't take anything away from us, that's not where the advantage lies" they hope to convince the FIA that this is not the droid they're looking for.
Jedi mind tricks all the way.
I do not get your problem on this one and what it has to do with the other things:Andres125sx wrote: Banning tons of technologies that actually make some production cars a lot more advanced than F1
Is there? Airflow is not only shaped by the car, it's used as an extention of the "bodywork" car in the shape of airflow structures, pressure zones, vortices etc.1.: Of course there is a big difference between the air flowing round the car and fluids or gases that are clearly a part of the car. You can not really count the air round the car as a part of it...so I like the thought that the fluids are a part of the car and influence aero.
It also means no aero-shaped suspension or stacked winglets-like brake ducts. Those are allowed, so why not fric?3.: Other parts? I think there are plenty even if you do not like the fluid. §3.15 also has the point of "Bodywork rules" in it. So no part influencing the the aero may be flexible. That means: No flexible hoses, no springs, no valves.
Active suspension used electronics but you don't need electronics to have an active suspension. Current FRIC systems are probably running small mechanical computers hidden away within those accumulators. With todays tooling making a mechanical computer to control the valves would be walk in the park for the F1 engineers (if that is the route they want to take)enri_the_red wrote:I think that the FIA deems the FRIC system to be a movable device because there is an hydraulics control unit that, through the use of valves, combines the input from each corner in order to generate an output. I suppose that a direct link between front and rear suspensions wouldn't be a problem, but the presence of valves, albeit not electronically controlled, casts some shadows on the legality of the system...