Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 82

Thread: F1 suspension row brews ahead of 2017 season

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Mumbai, India
    Posts
    9,826

    F1 suspension row brews ahead of 2017 season



    Leading Formula 1 teams could be forced to revise their suspension systems on the eve of the 2017 season amid a row brewing following a Ferrari query over trick technology that Mercedes has pioneered.

    Even though the high-tech FRIC (Front and Rear InterConnected) suspension system was effectively banned in 2014, it has not stopped some outfits finding alternative ways to improve the handling of their cars.

    Mercedes in particular has been at the forefront of developing fully-legal hydraulic systems to improve the overall stability of the chassis – which helps in braking and cornering – to assist in drivers’ ability to take more kerb, more aggressive driving lines and look after tyres better.

    It has been achieved through the team placing a heave (or third suspension element) behind the rocker assembly to control vertical displacement of the suspension. Such an arrangement is mirrored at the back of the car too.

    The benefits of the system were clear in 2016 – as Mercedes was so much better on tyre life – and it is believed that a number of outfits were preparing similar systems that took the technology even further.

    Red Bull has made great strides in the past 12 months on understanding the dynamics of its own car too, having managed to exploit once again the radical rake angles that have been so integral to its aerodynamic concept.

    Ferrari letter

    But the suspension technology being used has now been thrown into doubt after Ferrari queried the use of such concepts in correspondence with the FIA before Christmas.

    As is common practice in F1, teams can write to the FIA to discuss whether or not it believes new ideas are legal – and if the FIA says they are not, then rival teams are informed to help them avoid pursuing the concepts themselves.

    This system is also used by teams to try to clarify whether technology used by rival teams is legal too.

    In the letter to F1 race director Charlie Whiting, Ferrari’s chief designer Simone Resta said that the team wanted to propose a system that could replicate FRIC without there actually being a physical connection between the front and the rear of the car.

    The issue was whether or not these systems breached the catch-all Article 3.15 of F1’s technical regulations that effectively outlaws moveable aerodynamic devices, as they could help the car's aerodynamic characteristics.

    In the letter that Resta wrote, a copy of which was circulated to all teams, he stated: “We are considering a family of suspension devices that we believe could offer a performance improvement through a response that is a more complex function of the load at the wheels than would be obtained through a simple combination of springs, dampers and inerters.

    “In all cases they would be installed between some combination of the sprung part of the car and the two suspension rockers on a single axle, and achieve an effect similar to that of a FRIC system (Front Rear InterConnected suspension) without requiring any connection between the front and rear of the car.

    “All suspension devices in question feature a moveable spring seat and they use energy recovered from wheel loads and displacements to alter the position of the heave spring.

    “Their contribution to the primary purpose of the sprung suspension – the attachment of the wheels to the car in a manner which isolates the sprung part from road disturbances – is small, while their effect on ride height and hence aerodynamic performance is much larger, to the extent that we believe it could justify the additional weight and design complexity.

    “We would therefore question the legality of these systems under Art. 3.15 and its interpretation in TD/002-11, discriminating between whether certain details are “wholly incidental to the main purpose of the suspension system” or “have been contrived to directly affect the aerodynamic performance of the car”.

    Rules clarification

    Resta wanted the FIA to confirm whether suspension systems that had two characteristics were legal. They were concepts that exhibited either:

    1) displacement in a direction opposed to the applied load over some or all of its travel, regardless of the source of the stored energy used to achieve this.

    Or

    2) a means by which some of the energy recovered from the forces and displacements at the wheel can be stored for release at a later time to extend a spring seat or other parts of the suspension assembly whose movement is not defined by the principally vertical suspension travel of the two wheels.

    In response to Ferrari, Whiting said that he believed that any suspension system that acted in such a way was not in compliance with the regulations.

    Whiting said: “In our view any suspension system which was capable of altering the response of a car's suspension system in the way you describe in paragraphs 1) and 2) would be likely to contravene Article 3.15 of the F1 Technical Regulations.”

    Discussions ongoing

    Although Whiting’s response would appear to outlaw the use of the trick suspension technology, it is understood that teams running similar systems have now queried the situation – which means discussions are ongoing about what is and is not allowed for 2017.

    Any team running a device that could be interpreted as breaching the rules faces a dilemma though on whether to commit to it with its new car – and risk it being outlawed in a final ruling – or pursue an alternative system that may not be as competitive.

    F1’s first 2017 test is due to take place at Barcelona in Spain on February 27.

    http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1...season-862612/
    #KeepFightingMichael | #CiaoJules

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    1,256
    I hope Ferrari is asking for clarification because they have found a loop hole that will bring a significant performance advantage rather than trying to get other teams devices as being declared illegal.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Christchurch,UK
    Posts
    2,995
    There was some mention of Merc and RB having trick suspension in 2016 but then it seemed to be forgotten and/or deliberately dismissed, so I am pleased to see the subject being queried by OUR team, at least they're on the case! Dare we hope that there is some innovation at Maranello?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,301
    Well do we continue this and risk our fingers get burned if deemed illegal or do we stop it and hope they got it right?
    Oh the drama what to do eh.
    Hero's come and go, but legends never die!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Uppingham, UK
    Posts
    18,375
    I don't think Ferrari have pursued anything. I think they're asking because they know others have, and want it banned.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    hong kong
    Posts
    1,001
    So ferrari could have actually brought this up last year since it was still illegal back then, but decided to wait till the others are heavily into their 2017 cars??

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Mumbai, India
    Posts
    9,826
    Ferrari has reportedly made a bold bid to catch up in 2017 by designing a new suspension system, or have the Mercedes-pioneered concept banned by the FIA.

    Germany's Auto Bild claims that for its 2017 car codenamed 668, Ferrari has come up with a Mercedes-like, hydraulically-networked chassis.

    But before debuting it in late February, Ferrari "asked the FIA for clarification as to whether the (suspension) system is really legal".

    "If not, Mercedes would have to remove it," said correspondent Bianca Garloff.

    Ferrari is not commenting.

    But the same news is being reported by Italy's authoritative La Gazzetta dello Sport, adding that Red Bull also ran the Mercedes-like layout last year.

    And the newspaper said the FIA has responded to Ferrari's clarification request by telling the teams the Mercedes-like system is not allowed.

    Correspondent Paolo Filisetti wrote: "The world championship will not begin for three months, but the technical skirmish between the top teams has already reached a high level."

    The FIA's decision to ban the concept is reportedly because it varies the right-height of the car, not simply to act as traditional suspension but for aerodynamic effect.
    #KeepFightingMichael | #CiaoJules

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    215
    There's another interesting article about Mercedes and Redbull suspension tricks for 2017.
    http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/op...-2017-f1-title

    Good move by Ferrari though. All teams are near the end of the design of their cars. So Ferrari is trying to force Mercedes and Redbull redesign their cars in the last minute, but probably Mercedes and Redbull have already a 'plan b'.
    Last edited by Warp; 5th January 2017 at 09:41.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    700
    Well spotted and well worded by Simone Resta. Let's just hope this has more effect on the grid than James Allison's "loophole" find that we also all thought was very good and clever and which the token system was born out of. There's no need to let anything slide even though we all know it's basicly impossible to catch Mercedes because of the power unit. It doesn't matter how much the rules change if the power unit stays basicly the same (configuration and turbo). The only thing that can make Ferrari competitive again is if F1 would allow naturally aspirated V8 engines.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Kitchener, CANADA
    Posts
    5,478
    Quote Originally Posted by Warp View Post
    There's another interesting article about Mercedes and Redbull suspension tricks for 2017.
    http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/op...-2017-f1-title

    Good move by Ferrari though. All teams are near the end of the design of their cars. So Ferrari is trying to force Mercedes and Redbull redesign their cars in the last minute, but probably Mercedes and Redbull have already a 'plan b'.
    LET'S hope we have a plan B also, in case the suspension both Mercs and red fools have proves to be INDEED legal....and that we also have such suspension and set up as they do......otherwise it's gonna be another painful year for us.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    AREA 51
    Posts
    112
    http://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/ana...gioPiolaWidget

    This is really Interesting !
    So RB12 and RB13 Suspension is declared illegal.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    AREA 51
    Posts
    112
    Ups, sorry. This is the right lionk.
    http://www.f1analisitecnica.com/2017...sione-con.html

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Corpus Christi Tx
    Posts
    2,860
    Legal (borderline) because it is not active, that is not controlled by computer as FRIC was, and the front and rear suspensions are not linked in any way. It is very clever engineering and it needs to be adjusted (in the pits) before each race session according to the track style. Cannot be adjusted after the start of qualifying.

    Give credit to MB and RB for taking advantage of a spacer rule the FIA gave Manor where the nose connects the front wing. They(MB and RB) are thinking outside the box while still staying within the rule book.

    By the way, MB and RB have been using this "FRIC" now for over 2 years now and just now Ferrari is crying about it??????

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    France
    Posts
    138
    Quote Originally Posted by jgonzalesm6 View Post
    Legal (borderline) because it is not active, that is not controlled by computer as FRIC was, and the front and rear suspensions are not linked in any way. It is very clever engineering and it needs to be adjusted (in the pits) before each race session according to the track style. Cannot be adjusted after the start of qualifying.

    Give credit to MB and RB for taking advantage of a spacer rule the FIA gave Manor where the nose connects the front wing. They(MB and RB) are thinking outside the box while still staying within the rule book.

    By the way, MB and RB have been using this "FRIC" now for over 2 years now and just now Ferrari is crying about it??????
    Mercedes and red bull systems are not the same.
    Red bull is illegal,mercedes not.
    Pretty sure our will have It this year.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Delaware, USA
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by jpalmito View Post
    Mercedes and red bull systems are not the same.
    Red bull is illegal,mercedes not.
    Pretty sure our will have It this year.
    Seems to be a pattern at the Scuderia - they innovate, we imitate.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Corpus Christi Tx
    Posts
    2,860
    Agreed -- We are still putting the round peg in the square hole while MB and RB are on Quantum Mechanics!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    wilderness
    Posts
    1,571

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by jgonzalesm6 View Post
    Legal (borderline) because it is not active, that is not controlled by computer as FRIC was, and the front and rear suspensions are not linked in any way. It is very clever engineering and it needs to be adjusted (in the pits) before each race session according to the track style. Cannot be adjusted after the start of qualifying.

    Give credit to MB and RB for taking advantage of a spacer rule the FIA gave Manor where the nose connects the front wing. They(MB and RB) are thinking outside the box while still staying within the rule book.

    By the way, MB and RB have been using this "FRIC" now for over 2 years now and just now Ferrari is crying about it??????

    FRIC was passive also, wasn't it?? Computer controlled suspension elements were banned decades ago

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Uppingham, UK
    Posts
    18,375
    Apparently merc and red bull have to redesign their suspension after clarification from the FIA

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Corpus Christi Tx
    Posts
    2,860
    Winter Forza - Yes, the current FRIC system is passive, meaning it is NOT controlled by electronics and YES the ELECTRONIC FRIC system was banned in the 90's.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Corpus Christi Tx
    Posts
    2,860
    Ste - It is only a REQUEST that MB and RB have to redesign their suspensions, it is not a DEMAND due to legality issues. I guess attorneys from both sides (FIA and MB+RB) will be hashing it out these next few days or weeks. IMO, Charlie will drop the issue being the teams are at the final stages and make it a demand for 2018....by then, who knows. Maybe MB and RB will have a plan B or Charlie will make changes(amendment) to the statutes or articles of said rules regarding this system.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Kiato-Greece
    Posts
    1,990
    Ferrari does not agree with a technical trick from Mercedes and Red Bull. The Formula 1 2017 has its first technology dispute.
    It was the big story to kick off the New Year: Ferraris inquiry about the legality of a hydraulic damper system which Mercedes use and Red Bull since the last year. Ferrari chief designer Simone Resta asked Racing Director, Charlie Whiting, to what extent an extreme version of this mechanism was legal. The hydraulic damper should make sure that the car jumps less strongly over ground waves and notches and is thus quieter. Thus, the tire use is also to be improved.
    Ferrari wanted to know if kinetic energy of the damper must be stored so that the third suspension member can position the car aerodynamically perfect now. Whitings Answer: no! This does not mean that Mercedes and Red Bull have to expand their systems. The mechanism is legal as long as no energy is stored in order to optimally align the car aerodynamically.
    On the Internet it is now speculated that Ferrari wanted to shorten the delay on Red Bull and Mercedes with a requested ban of the suspension variant. The Scuderia has only succeeded in part: Red Bull is no longer allowed to change the angle of attack of his car via dampers and "do not use 100%", says the team.
    The interpretation from Italy, however, is different. The technicians around Simone Resta wanted to see how far they can actually go with the system. Background: The engineers plan an extremely aggressive version of the suspension and therefore explore the limits of the permissible.
    According to AUTO BILD MOTORSPORT, Ferrari is also planning a so-called S-shaft for the model with the number 668, which directs air through the nose and prevents the airflow from tearing (see drawing). The latest legal version had in 2016 among others Mercedes and Toro Rosso. In addition, the position of the mirrors becomes critical. Reason: The visibility is restricted because of the lower tail wing.
    And: Although increases the maximum width of the body, the side pods probably remain as narrow as in 2016. Background: Due to the wide tires , the air flow is in this area anyway disturbed so that a widening of the car is not worth for aerodynamic reasons.
    FERRARI FOR EVER !!!!!!!

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Macedonia(FYROM)
    Posts
    658
    f1talks.pl ‏@f1talks 2h2 hours ago
    According to Marko Red Bull will not have to redesign suspension in RB13. They will use less efficient system to stay on the limit. #F1
    https://twitter.com/f1talks

  23. #23
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Kiato-Greece
    Posts
    1,990
    Mercedes & Red Bull not affected by FIA suspension rule clarification.https://t.co/wya6svRktM
    FERRARI FOR EVER !!!!!!!

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    1,050
    RB and MB would SAY they aren't affected. Doesn't mean I'm going to believe them.

    As usual Ferrari are not innovators. We spent a whole year perhaps longer in MB case at a competitive disadvantage because these team found a clever way to avoid rules violations.

    Until I see otherwise, I have no idea where Ferrari's design and engineering structure will yield winning solutions.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Veles
    Posts
    111

    Mad

    La Gazzetta dello Sport had claimed the FIA ruled out the latest design concepts, used in 2016 by Mercedes and Red Bull, on the basis they were being used for aerodynamic effect.
    But now Auto Bild claims that only Ferrari's proposed 2017 version has actually been declared illegal by the FIA,.
    Damn if it is true, then, I wish to all of you Happy New Year 2018 in advance and I'm waiting for the next 2018 season!

  26. #26
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Ireland somewhere
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by bobi_ve View Post
    Damn if it is true, then, I wish to all of you Happy New Year 2018 in advance and I'm waiting for the next 2018 season!
    To me that's actually good news, it shows that Ferrari are pushing the design to the boundaries of what's legal and what's not. If the RB and Merc ones are legal then maybe they haven't pushed hard enough and Ferrari now have the better system.

    But you and all the other Negative Nellies will no doubt continue to predict us being the worse team next season again even though we know nothing about any of the cars.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Corpus Christi Tx
    Posts
    2,860
    macks - - It actually shows the complete opposite on a number of fronts and as some of us have responded on this particular subject in this forum:

    1) This "FRIC" system has been used by a several teams for over 2 years but only one has perfected it according to the rules and given the time frame...that being Mercedes Benz....and every year that have used it, they have progressed and have innovated it even further.

    2) Just now Ferrari is coming into the fray in using its "imitation" system and if the article is right and true, Ferrari ( who have been working feverishly and have put in the time) cannot get it right and will have to put in more time to get it right according to the rules.

    3) The letter that Ferrari gave to the FIA regarding this "FRIC" system is a desperation move and shows, at least to me, the letter backfired on us and now we look bad from a PR persective with regards to this just-now-published article (IF TRUE).

    4) Also, and alot of us will wait and see @ Melbourne, is the engine and I will leave it at that.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    27,818
    Quote Originally Posted by jgonzalesm6 View Post
    macks - - It actually shows the complete opposite on a number of fronts and as some of us have responded on this particular subject in this forum:

    1) This "FRIC" system has been used by a several teams for over 2 years but only one has perfected it according to the rules and given the time frame...that being Mercedes Benz....and every year that have used it, they have progressed and have innovated it even further.

    2) Just now Ferrari is coming into the fray in using its "imitation" system and if the article is right and true, Ferrari ( who have been working feverishly and have put in the time) cannot get it right and will have to put in more time to get it right according to the rules.

    3) The letter that Ferrari gave to the FIA regarding this "FRIC" system is a desperation move and shows, at least to me, the letter backfired on us and now we look bad from a PR persective with regards to this just-now-published article (IF TRUE).

    4) Also, and alot of us will wait and see @ Melbourne, is the engine and I will leave it at that.
    1) So?
    2) Better to innovate rather than imitate.
    3) Teams are in constant contact with FIA, hardly a new thing or something others don't do. It's nothing to do with desperation or bad PR.
    Forza Ferrari

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    1,470
    I think I read somewhere that there were over 50 requests by different teams for rules 'clarifications' from the FIA this past season. Don't know why so many here are so quick to criticise Ferrari for every move they make.
    Seem to remember Mercedes questioning FIA if what Ferrari & Haas did was legal or not. Of course it was worded that if merc did something like that, would it be legal.

    BTW, from everything I read on F1 sites, the FIA have ruled that the suspension Ferrari submitted would not be legal on a 2017 car. Based on that, the design used on the RB12 (RB's 2016 car) would also not be legal on a 2017 car (at least that's my take on it).
    The FIA gave Ferrari an opinion on Ferrari's question & per their usual practice have copied all the teams with that official response. To my knowledge they don't "request" any redesigns from the teams, they DO inspect the cars for compliance to the rules after they've been built.
    Forza Ferrari !
    "You need great passion, because everything you do with great pleasure, you do well." - Juan Manuel Fangio

  30. #30
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Ireland somewhere
    Posts
    28
    Sending letters to the FIA for clarification on rules is nothing new or unusual. The media on the other hand blows these stories out of the water just because it come out on the wrong side for Ferrari. How many times has the same happened for Merc / RB etc? A lot more than what's reported that's for sure.

    The FIA saying Ferraris system will be illegal is something Ferrari would have been expecting, but like everything else in life, "if you don't ask you won't get". You can be dam sure they have a second legal system to use instead of the one they were inquiring about.

    And just because other teams had this system running for the last 2 years doesn't mean that Ferraris system will be worse.

    the whole point I was making was people on here are all predicting doom and gloom based on 1 letter from the FIA. Try having a bit of faith in our team and at least wait until a few races in before slagging off the new car. We'll know nothing about it until first practice down under.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •