Technical What the fric are the FIA up to now?
- Thread starter snowy
- Start date
The Artist.....
Champion Elect
Saw a German article just now stating that Merc and Red Bull won't be Fricking at the German Grand Prix...
The flurry of articles churned out about FRIC in the last two days is nothing short of overwhelming. And when it comes down to it, nobody has any idea how any of this is going to turn out.
You've gotta love this SkySports headline
http://www1.skysports.com/f1/news/2...-fric-suspension-could-hurt-mercedes-the-most
You've gotta love this SkySports headline
Max Chilton believes an outlawing of FRIC suspension could hurt Mercedes the most
Here's what Max actually said though. Not exactly authoritative.
http://www1.skysports.com/f1/news/2...-fric-suspension-could-hurt-mercedes-the-most
Exactly how I read it KekeTheKing, just stereotypically bad journalistic licence creating the appearance of a story. But then I remembered who owns Sky and it all made sense. 
http://www.gpupdate.net/en/f1-news/313397/technical-formula-1-s-impending-fric-ban/
This does a very lucid job of explaining the situation. I especially like the line : "Just because everyone is cheating doesn't make it right."
This does a very lucid job of explaining the situation. I especially like the line : "Just because everyone is cheating doesn't make it right."
What a massive oversimplification of the situation. And it's far from clear that anybody is cheating.
The FIA don't even really want to ban it, their main goal is to create instability within the Teams' ranks.
edit - If FRIC is indeed ditched, the only thing I'll be interested to hear is which team or teams did not want to continue running it.
Last edited:
snowy
Champion Elect
Fenderman
Rooters Reporter
A fine example of FIA double standards. Incidentally ...
Rootersports is hearing through the grapevine that ALL suspension systems, wheels and pneumatic tyres are to be banned under the same regulation. Charlie has found out that when such devices rotate, squish, squash, flex, squat, bound, rebound and otherwise move in any way, the aerodynamics of the car is affected. Indeed, the FIA is now faced with a paradox since if an F1 car is in motion it is, in its entirety, a movable aerodynamic device. F1 is dead. Long live F1.
On a serious note: One key advantage of a good FRIC system is to confer additional mechanical grip. More mechanical grip is highly desirable since it can reduce reliance on aerodynamics conferred by the front and rear wings. Question: If more teams adopt decent systems, would more cars be able to run closer together in turns with more opportunities for genuine overtaking?
Rootersports is hearing through the grapevine that ALL suspension systems, wheels and pneumatic tyres are to be banned under the same regulation. Charlie has found out that when such devices rotate, squish, squash, flex, squat, bound, rebound and otherwise move in any way, the aerodynamics of the car is affected. Indeed, the FIA is now faced with a paradox since if an F1 car is in motion it is, in its entirety, a movable aerodynamic device. F1 is dead. Long live F1.
On a serious note: One key advantage of a good FRIC system is to confer additional mechanical grip. More mechanical grip is highly desirable since it can reduce reliance on aerodynamics conferred by the front and rear wings. Question: If more teams adopt decent systems, would more cars be able to run closer together in turns with more opportunities for genuine overtaking?
Last edited:
So Fenderman, what you are saying is that this particular design gives drivers more ooportunity to overtake on the track, and the FIA want to ban it. On the other hand the FIA are coming up with obviously moveable aero devices (DRS) that breach the same rule and yet are designed to cause more overtaking?
But I am so confused, this doesn't make any sense (even if you ignore the fact the device has been deemed legal for a number of years). Why would the FIA do something so stupid!?!?
Oh wait, it is the FIA, just business as usual then.
Just to point out one minor thing, this doesn't fall under the moveable aero device definition or fall fowl of the test that is designed to prove it. All aero devices remain in a constant physical un-moved relationship with the point of measurement (the floor of the car) and this is not dampered in the same way as the Renault of 2005/6. By the definition of the FIA rules on moveable aero the whole system is perfectly legal. But since when has that stopped the FIA imposing a rule that doesn't apply?
But I am so confused, this doesn't make any sense (even if you ignore the fact the device has been deemed legal for a number of years). Why would the FIA do something so stupid!?!?
Oh wait, it is the FIA, just business as usual then.
Just to point out one minor thing, this doesn't fall under the moveable aero device definition or fall fowl of the test that is designed to prove it. All aero devices remain in a constant physical un-moved relationship with the point of measurement (the floor of the car) and this is not dampered in the same way as the Renault of 2005/6. By the definition of the FIA rules on moveable aero the whole system is perfectly legal. But since when has that stopped the FIA imposing a rule that doesn't apply?
Fenderman
Rooters Reporter
Heh, heh, yes indeed, canis , I was being somewhat liberal with my interpretation of Charlie's directive - only for comedic effect of course 
For the record, here is Article 3.15 of the FIA F1 2014 Technical Regulations (the reg' Charlie is applying in this case):
For the record, here is Article 3.15 of the FIA F1 2014 Technical Regulations (the reg' Charlie is applying in this case):
3.15 Aerodynamic influence :
With the exception of the driver adjustable bodywork described in Article 3.18 (in addition to minimal parts solely associated with its actuation) and the ducts described in Article 11.4, any specific part of the car influencing its aerodynamic performance :
a) Must comply with the rules relating to bodywork.
b) Must be rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car (rigidly secured means not having any degree of freedom).
c) Must remain immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car.
Any device or construction that is designed to bridge the gap between the sprung part of the car and the ground is prohibited under all circumstances.
No part having an aerodynamic influence and no part of the bodywork, with the exception of the skid block in 3.13 above, may under any circumstances be located below the reference plane.
With the exception of the parts necessary for the adjustment described in Article 3.18, any car system, device or procedure which uses driver movement as a means of altering the aerodynamic characteristics of the car is prohibited.
With the exception of the driver adjustable bodywork described in Article 3.18 (in addition to minimal parts solely associated with its actuation) and the ducts described in Article 11.4, any specific part of the car influencing its aerodynamic performance :
a) Must comply with the rules relating to bodywork.
b) Must be rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car (rigidly secured means not having any degree of freedom).
c) Must remain immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car.
Any device or construction that is designed to bridge the gap between the sprung part of the car and the ground is prohibited under all circumstances.
No part having an aerodynamic influence and no part of the bodywork, with the exception of the skid block in 3.13 above, may under any circumstances be located below the reference plane.
With the exception of the parts necessary for the adjustment described in Article 3.18, any car system, device or procedure which uses driver movement as a means of altering the aerodynamic characteristics of the car is prohibited.
Last edited:
I presume that when the hydraulic fluid within the system moves, and aerodynamics are then affected, the whole thing becomes a moveable aerodynamic device.
If they ban FRICS, they'll have to prohibit drivers from a) containing any fluids and b) moving. Or ban them altogether.
If they ban FRICS, they'll have to prohibit drivers from a) containing any fluids and b) moving. Or ban them altogether.
Incubus
Champion Elect
--------------------------------------------------------
... and here we go back to the same old problem of extraordinarily poorly-worded rules, open to any sort of interpretation one could bestow on.
When it comes to suspensions or indeed anything directly attached to the wheels, what does "moveable aero device" even mean?!...
Front brake-ducts are exposed to airflow, they move when the driver steers the car.
Are they gonna ban brake-ducts too while they're at it?
I posted this in the bling rims thread but it's very apt for this thread too.
The face of future F1:
The face of future F1:
I posted this in the bling rims thread but it's very apt for this thread too.
The face of future F1:
The plank looks a little far of the ground to me.
......and I don't like the way its had its edges sanded down and curved for better aero dynamics.
Similar threads
- Article
