Technical Adjustable ride height - legal or illegal?

[Muddytalker]

They could, and I'm only saying could, avoid rule 10.2.3 by making any change during a pitstop.

Obviously, the more pit stops a car makes, any changes could then be made more gradually, and so be more effective.
Would you say that is correct, Mr Horner, that making more pit stops would have a beneficial effect, if one was to use such a system?

 

[teabagyokel]

Of course, if one of your cars has brake failure and the other is hitting McLarens left, right and centre, adjustable ride height is of no benefit at all.

 

[snowy]

Is this Purple Pole Syndrome? Perhaps it is...

The Red Bull and Ferrari's relative race and qualifying pace suggests that there is something going on in this area. They are 0.6 or 7 seconds faster than McLaren in qualifying but 0.1 or .2 in the race.

Renault appears to have been suspected of a ratchet system since before the start of season testing!

 

[Brogan]

The FIA are not investigating Red Bull.

But Germany's Auto Motor und Sport quoted an FIA spokesman as saying "there is no investigation".

Oh yes they are!

Swiss newspaper Blick reported the FIA "is now investigating" whether the Red Bull is somehow adjusting its ride-height depending on the amount of fuel in the tank. "Whether there is a decision before the Malaysian grand prix is open," read the report.

http://en.espnf1.com/redbull/motorsport/story/13010.html

Clear as mud as usual.

I presume it's because no-one has lodged a formal protest.
Until that happens, as we all know, the FIA won't take any action on their own initiative.

 

[FB]

Q. What's a ratchet?

A. A little bit bigger than a mouse sh#t

I'll get me coat...

 

[Boyle]

Q. What's a ratchet?

A. A little bit bigger than a mouse sh#t

I'll get me coat...

You can leave without it!

 

[Brogan]

 

[Brogan]

More rumours/speculation on the system Red Bull are using.

The secret of Red Bull's supposed adjustable ride-height system is compressed gas, according to strong rumours inside the Sepang paddock on Thursday.

Officials for McLaren and Mercedes have admitted their suspicions about the system, with the dominant Adrian Newey-designed RB6 somehow able to have a low-ride height in qualifying and then not bottom-out when gallons of fuel are added prior to the race.
[...]
It seems, however, that Red Bull could have simply interpreted the rules cleverly, rather than broken them.

An article in the technical regulations prohibits "any powered device" that affects the suspension system, while another forbids adjustments "while the car is in motion".

But the parc ferme rules, found in the separate sporting regulations, do allow "compressed gases" to be "drained or added" from the cars in the period after qualifying and before the race.

And another rule says a driver will only be penalised with a pitlane start if the team "makes changes to the set up of the suspension" during parc ferme.

The rumour in Malaysia is that all Red Bull is doing is draining compressed gas from a system aboard the RB6, which is resulting in a raised ride-height for the race.

More here: http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=362347&FS=F1

It also suggests Ferrari are preparing to lodge a challenge so expect another drawn out legal dispute.

 

[slickskid]

I can see introducing gas to make something rise but taking it out?

 

[Muddytalker]

I can see introducing gas to make something rise but taking it out?

The gasses are added post-qualifying to raise the car before the race.

Now, whether they then leave it so the car is still 'high' by the end of the race, or they use a previously mentioned 'leak' system to gradually lower the car again as the fuel goes down is probably where the legality is in doubt.

 

[Brogan]

I can see introducing gas to make something rise but taking it out?

The gasses are added post-qualifying to raise the car before the race.

According to the article, "all Red Bull is doing is draining compressed gas from a system aboard the RB6, which is resulting in a raised ride-height for the race."

So they are in fact removing gasses, not adding them.

 

[slickskid]

I can see introducing gas to make something rise but taking it out?

The gasses are added post-qualifying to raise the car before the race.

Now, whether they then leave it so the car is still 'high' by the end of the race, or they use a previously mentioned 'leak' system to gradually lower the car again as the fuel goes down is probably where the legality is in doubt.

I understand your theory but thats not what they are saying which is the opposite...

The rumour in Malaysia is that all Red Bull is doing is draining compressed gas from a system aboard the RB6, which is resulting in a raised ride-height for the race.

 

[fat jez]

I can see introducing gas to make something rise but taking it out?

I think this might be how they are doing it. They pump gas into the top for qualifying, which compresses a spring, causing the car to sink on its suspension. When they release the gas back out, the tension of the spring overcomes the force created by the remaining gas, which causes the car to rise up. It's basically a piston in reverse, I think.

 

[Muddytalker]

My mistake.

Next week, I'm taking advanced adding up, as well as reading.

Edit: - Thinking back - Aren't Red Bull the only team to use a pullrod rear suspension, rather than pushrods. Therefore, by removing gas from the damper, this will compress the springs/damper, thereby raising the chassis.

In which case then, towards the end of the race, the car is 'up on stilts' like the rest of the grid, only they had the advantage of starting on the front row.

 

[Brogan]

If it is legal then once again it is very clever use of a loophole in the regulations.

You have to admire the people who are able to spot this sort of thing but is this what F1 should be about?

 

[fat jez]

They'd have to be very careful that the bleed valve won't leak or suddenly vent. If we assume there's one on each wheel/suspension strut, then can you imagine the effect on the car if all the gas under pressure suddenly vented? I'd guess it would pitch that corner of the car up, severly and suddenly affecting the handling of the car at best and flipping that corner of the car up at worst. Sounds highly risky to me!

 

[snowy]

Perhaps we don't have to imagine...

Lots of sparks and the car pitches off the circuit the first time you hit the brakes...

 

[Fenderman]

Hi Folk's,

Adding and removing gas ... The effects of adding or removing gas from the damper in a suspension unit are twofold. On the one hand adding and therefore compressing the gas will increase the resistance of the suspension unit to load. On the other hand preload and rebound will also be affected. The compressed gas is part of the shock absorbing mechanism but rather than apply compression to the suspension spring it will actually provide support by sharing the load.

The load on the suspension whilst the car is at rest will be the "sprung" mass of the car, fuel and driver but excluding the "unsprung" mass of hubs, wheels, brakes and associated ducts.

In motion the load on the suspension will be variable comprising not only both the sprung and unsprung mass of the vehicle but also the subsequent loads resulting from the complex interaction of the g forces imparted by braking, acceleration and cornering in addition to the reaction of the suspension to bumps and dips in the track.

The upshot of all of this is that with more gas compressed within the damper the suspension will be stiffer, resisting the various loads and therefore maintaining a greater ride height. the opposite will be the case if the quantity of compressed gas is reduced - i.e. softer suspension and (depending on how radical the change is) a lower ride height as the springs have less assistance from the preloading.

To make this work properly as a means of adjusting ride height there will need to be some kind of actuated release valve that is precisely controllable as the whole system will be affected by the range of parameters I alluded to above (particularly the g forces) and will affect the cars response to those parameters.

In my humble view if the Red Bull boffins have pulled this off it can't be a passive system as might be in the spirit of the rules and I would think somewhat more than a knee operated flap. It'll be something very clever so, I find this one really fascinating and will be watching this space intently.

p.s. Preload, bound and rebound adjustments are made by mechanically altering the pressure on suspension unit springs or by varying the degree of "twist" on torsion bar suspension. I don't know whether the front suspension on the Red Bull is of a sprung or a torsion bar design but suffice to say that all the stuff I said above would only apply to suspension mechanisms with air/fluid type shock absorbers (i.e. piston type damper) as part of the assembly.

 

[snowy]

Christian Horner continues to state catagorically that Red Bull has no adjustable ride height system.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/82741

And in a new twist the FIA proposes allowing an adjustment to be made between quali and race. All the teams would need to agree to change the rules and allow it though. And that seems unlikely...

It is understood that the FIA is considering ending the prospect of an expensive spending war between teams creating complex suspension systems that help optimise the car for both qualifying and the race, by allowing outfits to make a single change to ride heights between Saturday and Sunday.


Horner said Red Bull would have no problem in backing the FIA's push – which would end all allegations about his team doing something clever with its suspension.

"I would support it, as it would probably save us a bit of money," he said.

Had the FIA lifted the ridiculous parc fermme rules after qualifying allowing the teams to set the car up for race conditions (such as rain DER!) in the first place, then F1 would have saved themselves several million $'s and another contentious issue...

 

[Brogan]

The FIA has finally spoken on the issue:

"Any system device or procedure, the purpose and/or effect of which is to change the set-up of the suspension, while the car is under parc ferme conditions will be deemed to contravene art 34.5* of the sporting regulations,"

Red Bull's car has apparently been thoroughly checked and given the all-clear so it's all a bit odd.

Full story: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/82763