***Official 2010 F1 thread***

Speculation - although many have commented that you are able to hear the RB6's plank hitting the floor in qually, which you really shouldn't if it's on low fuel. One logical explanation, is that the car is being lowered for qually, and raised when race fuel is added.

Silly McLaren spending all that money on their variable ride height system!!

Su

Su
 
Sumanji said:
Speculation - although many have commented that you are able to hear the RB6's plank hitting the floor in qually, which you really shouldn't if it's on low fuel. One logical explanation, is that the car is being lowered for qually, and raised when race fuel is added.

Silly McLaren spending all that money on their variable ride height system!!

Su

Su
Click to expand...

I dont think you are allowed to alter the ride height from qualifying into the race. Otherwise everyone would be doing just that.
 
sunama said:
If it really is as simple as that, why don't all the other team follow this simple/obvious technique?
Click to expand...

Because you can't make any suspension adjustments after the car has left the pits for Q1. If the suspension is being adjusted then it's against the Parc Ferme rules.
 
Yes, you're not allowed to manually alter it - that's why RBR allegedly have a system to mechanically auto-alter this as the fuel is added/burnt.

Don't ask me how it might work or why other teams haven't thought of this - I'm not an engineer :p go look on F1 Technical, or other similar sites. I'm sure someone clever has thought up an explanation.

Su
 
Sumanji said:
Yes, you're not allowed to manually alter it - that's why RBR allegedly have a system to mechanically auto-alter this as the fuel is added/burnt.

Don't ask me how it might work or why other teams haven't thought of this - I'm not an engineer :p go look on F1 Technical, or other similar sites. I'm sure someone clever has thought up an explanation.

Su
Click to expand...

Because that isn't allowed either. FIA have clarified that regulation in the last couple of days.
 
What's the logic behind not being able to adjust the ride height for qualifying? I'm all for qualifying in the same car you're going to be racing in. But given the dramatic weight difference in fuel loads now it seems a shame to 'handicap' the cars for qualifying in this way for want of a few turns of a spanner in Parc Ferme.
 
It's to stop the mechanics doing what they used to do between qualifying and the race.
Strip and rebuild the cars.

There were cases when there was no engine limit or parc ferme of engines that were designed to do 3 laps, minimal radiators, everything pared down to the absolute minimum to do those 3 laps. Overnight, the car would be rebuilt into the car that would actually race.

If you allow them to adjust the suspension, why not the wings? Or the brakes? Or the geometry? Or the ballast? They're all relatively minor changes.
 
Yeah, I agree Flibster. I just think that the two could have gone hand in hand. Ban refilling (qualify light, race heavy) and relax the Parc Ferme rule on ride height.
 
Sumanji said:
Speculation - although many have commented that you are able to hear the RB6's plank hitting the floor in qually, which you really shouldn't if it's on low fuel. One logical explanation, is that the car is being lowered for qually, and raised when race fuel is added.

Silly McLaren spending all that money on their variable ride height system!!

Su

Su
Click to expand...

How do you know that McLaren have actually spent money designing a system? They've managed to get the rules clarified and sorted so if teams were using a clever system they now have to remove it and so are comparable to those who never went down that design route.
 
Did you read the clarification? It made no mention, at all, about systems which use the fuel tank as a pressurised part of the suspension. Which is what all this fuss is about!

I'm not sure why all the F1 sites seem to be missing it. But basically the FIA has just made a press release containing an excerpt of the technical rules and, because it mentions nothing about what RBR / McLaren are interested in, the FIA has effectively greenlighted it. This is the exact confirmation that McLaren wanted. And because it has all been made public (as McLaren would have wanted) it means the FIA can't (easily) reject their car in scrutineering in China. They will be full speed ahead now (if they weren't already) to get it ready for China.

Got to love F1 for this stuff. It's just a swirling pot of technology and politics :D
 
clv101 said:
Yeah, I agree Flibster. I just think that the two could have gone hand in hand. Ban refilling (qualify light, race heavy) and relax the Parc Ferme rule on ride height.
Click to expand...

But that still wouldn't match the pace of the RBR car. Because that car dynamically adjusts its height based upon how much fuel is inside the tank!

As the race goes on, the car progressively gets lower and lower.

This is not something that Ferrari's "manual" system in the pits can do.
 
NathanE said:
Did you read the clarification? It made no mention, at all, about systems which use the fuel tank as a pressurised part of the suspension. Which is what all this fuss is about!
Click to expand...

Yes it did...

The FIA said on Wednesday: "Any system, device or procedure, the purpose and/or the effect of which is to change the set up of the suspension whilst the car is under parc ferme conditions, will be deemed to contravene Article 34.5 of the F1 Sporting Regulations."


The letter added that the FIA believed "any self levelling damper system is likely to contravene (article) 3.15 of the technical regulations".
 
The devil is in the details.

"we believe xxx is likely to contravene xxx" is not exactly the wording of a confident FIA ;)

If you read into the clauses mentioned (such as 3.15), again, they all refer to such things as parc fermé and whether or not something is allowed to be controlled by the driver.

The magic in the RBR system is that the ride height alters by itself, without the driver doing anything! People are calling it "active suspension" but actually it is no such thing - it is PASSIVELY-ACTIVE suspension!


You have to remember that the FIA hasn't made up any new rules here, or changed any. It has merely quoted the existing rules. Rather pointless really. But it was the breakthrough that McLaren (and other teams) needed in order to proceed with confidence.
 
dannyjo22 said:
Yes it did...

The FIA said on Wednesday: "Any system, device or procedure, the purpose and/or the effect of which is to change the set up of the suspension whilst the car is under parc ferme conditions, will be deemed to contravene Article 34.5 of the F1 Sporting Regulations."


The letter added that the FIA believed "any self levelling damper system is likely to contravene (article) 3.15 of the technical regulations".
Click to expand...

I think the pertinent get out clause is
"whilst the car is under parc ferme conditions"
A pressurised system using the fuel tank would not alter ride height whilst in Parc Ferme until the fuel load is changed, and in that case the ride height changes naturally anyway.


And as Nathan points out,
"any self levelling damper system is likely to contravene (article) 3.15 of the technical regulations"
is exceedingly loose..

Suspension will already incorporate the equivalent of non-linear damping rates/springs, which effectively change the suspension parameters dependant on things such as 'weight'.. Sounds like a very grey area indeed.
 
Last edited:
It's a shockingly big flaw in the rules really. I remember teams talking about the 2010 cars in 2009 with regard to ride heights and what not - and that it will be critical to get it right.

It's clear that RBR got it spot on. And Ferrari at least gave it some thought but, perhaps after realising the possible reliability nightmares involved in a Fiat "pressurised fuel tank" system :D, decided to opt for their more retro manually adjustable ride height system.

McLaren though... despite talking about the importance of ride heights in 2009... completely dropped the ball on this one! Shows how easy it is to get stuck and be unable to think outside of the box. I think it is things like this that Adrian Newey was referring to in 2009 after they won Silverstone when he said that he was loving the new 2009 and 2010 regulations because they allowed him for the first time in years to actually innovate and be successful.

I'm annoyed McLaren (and other teams) didn't spot it earlier :D Afterall, they managed to spot a far more contrieved loophole in the form of the F-duct :mad: :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom