Off Throttle Diffuser Ban is GO for Silverstone. So who will be on pole ?

[sportsman]

But wasn't there some kerfuffle about this before Monaco? I've forgotten the chronology, but I thought the FIA initially proposed a ban, then deferred until discussion with TWG (or some similar acronym), and Kolles spoke of protests after it was decided to postpone the ban.

Even as a McLaren fan wanting to see as Newey put it so well a "wild card thrown into the pack", I do see his/Red Bull's point; if it's not dangerous, why a mid-season ban?

Your quite right f1fan.There was indeed a "kerfuffle" as you so eloquently put.It was postponed exactly as you said it was.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/9489310.stm
Teams have won a stay of execution over a ban on Formula 1's latest must-have technology at this weekend's Spanish Grand Prix.
Governing body the FIA had outlawed the practice of continuing to flow gases out of the exhaust even when drivers are off the throttle in corners.
Teams, including dominant Red Bull, have been using this to increase grip.
But the FIA has decided to postpone the ban after representations from the teams about its effect.
A top-level source said "unintended consequences and complications" had become apparent - and that teams would have had to put significant work into changing their engine maps ahead of the race.
Any decision will now be delayed until after the sport's Technical Working Group meets on 16 June, when the issue will be discussed by team engineers and FIA race director Charlie Whiting.

 

[teabagyokel]

I think the most important line in that article is:

The FIA regards this as a waste of fuel, as well as contravention of article 3.15 of the technical regulations, which among other things dictates that driver movement that affects the aerodynamic characteristics of the car is not allowed.

In essence, the Engine Blown Diffuser already broke article 3.15. So basically the enforcement of this ban was postponed until the "unintended consequences and complications" could be ironed out and the FIA didn't have to disqualify the majority of the grid in each F1 race!

 

[Road of Bones]

A fascinating development - interesting to hear Newey come out & say that Red Bull will be affected by the EDB ban after all (unless it's more Red Bull sandbagging, of course...) - though I suppose it'll depend on how badly all the other teams will be hamstrung too. I'm sure there are sleepless nights going on at McLaren at the moment...

So - seems to be a case of Red Bull giving you wings, before the FIA clips them...

 

[teabagyokel]

The important thing is that the order of the cars has been claimed to aid and to punish almost every team towards the sharp end of the grid thus far!

Of course, if its wet, the results since 2007 suggest McLaren could have an advantage.

 

[sportsman]

Its important to remember that the blown diffuser is still operational.So as soon as the driver stamps on the throttle on the exit to a bend or under accelleration it will still work as usual.
The biggest effect will be when the cars are braking (not breaking as it usually misspelt) as then it will provide no extra downforce.
However it should be noted that the FIA have allowed the off throttle positions to match the engine revs or not fully closed.
The engine manufacturers had expressed concern that if the throttles closed to the "idle" position that would result in damage to the engine internals due to the very lean mixture that the engine would suffer.

 

[mjo]

Hamilton on pole, especially if it's wet. But I don't see him winning the race though..

 

[Incubus]

I don't see Hamilton on pole at this track, but then again I don't see a Ferrari on pole either. I do think the Red Bull will have lost a not-inconsiderable performance advantage. And this is not a track the Mercedes will thrive on either.

I know I am necessarily wrong in at least one of these statements because well, somebody will have to be on pole eventually...

 

[sportsman]

Newey seems genuinally worried about the off-throttle reg changes. Don't see why he'd say such comments for no reason, he's not the PR kind and on the odd occasion he does speak to the press he speaks his mind and the truth:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/formula_one/14035942.stm

Sounds like RB are having to redesign their car a little!

Something has been bothering me about that story.I seem to recall that Newey made a very similair statement, indeed almost word for the same as that about six weeks ago.
I can't remember where I saw it or indeed find it.Anyone else remember something very similair.
Or is my imagination.I am old so it might be "senile dementia"

 

[KekeTheKing]

I honestly thought the same thing when I saw this article sportsman. But some quick google searches are not turning up anything. I might keep poking around though.

edit - this article appeared on June 27
http://en.espnf1.com/f1/motorsport/story/52824.html

 

[sportsman]

That may be the one I am thinking of.But I thought the time that I first saw it was when the intial ban that was postoned.
Having said that there were so many aticles that have been written its a job to remember any particular one.

 

[sportsman]

There's this from Charlie Whiting FIA Q&A.
I can't make head nor tail of it, maybe someone else can.

http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/pressreleases/f1releases/2011/Pages/cw-qa.aspx We only want to target this one specific issue – what we think is illegal use of maps for aero reasons. We don't want to influence the perfectly legitimate systems on the car – engine braking for example. We're happy for them to use that, but we want to be sure it isn't being abused.

We're saying that if a driver comes off the throttle – zero pedal – then the throttles have got to be [maximum] 10 per cent open at 12,000rpm and [maximum] 20 per cent open at 18,000rpm.

One engine manufacturer is asking for a little bit more – for what appear to be genuine reasons. We have the ability to go back on this particular point, to look at 2009 maps, when [teams] did not have in place the exhausts that they have now. If they needed 28 per cent throttle in order to achieve 0Nm at 18,000rpm back then, then that would appear to be a perfectly reasonable request.
A lot of it depends on engine architecture. For example, we have to be very careful not to disadvantage barrel throttles versus butterfly throttles, because they have a distinctly different way of working. In answer to the question, if it's clear that in 2009 one engine with a butterfly throttle only needed 15 per cent [at zero pedal] but another engine using a barrel throttle needed 20 per cent, we could make a distinction. We don't want to put a figure across the board which will affect one team in a different way to another.

 

[Brogan]

There may be a few links in the original thread discussing the ban: http://cliptheapex.com/threads/tech...be-restricted-or-not-as-the-case-may-be.2674/

Probably towards the end of the thread.

 

[ExtremeNinja]

Will Red Bull run the same rake and if they don't how will this affect the overall aerodynamics of the car?

Will McLaren's sidepods and Torro Rosso's double floor give them an advantage by directing more airflow to the diffuser therefor negating some of the loss from the EBD?

I know I keep asking these questions and I apologise for the repetition, but I haven't stopped asking myself. I guess soon we will know. Does anyone have an inkling?

 

[ExtremeNinja]

There's this from Charlie Whiting FIA Q&A.
I can't make head nor tail of it, maybe someone else can.

I think this is to do with engine resistance off throttle, which is effectively engine braking. The two different throttle systems potentially produce or require different levels of throttle to produce the same amount of mechanical resistance. Putting a blanket figure on the throttle limit could inproportianately disadvantage a particular engine for braking. A mechanical disadvantage unrelated to the EBD aero advantage. Looking back to 2007 would provide benchmark figures for determining wether they could inadvertently be applying a double-disadvantage to a particular supplier and the teams that run thier engines.

 

[no-FIAt-please]

Hard to say whether McLaren will have gained on RB because Silverstone is a circuit which inherently suits the RB7 as it is a circuit which demands a high level of downforce, therefore the margin may be the same in Britain but in Gernmany it may be a lot closer.

As for Torro Rosso who knows, do they even have a fully functioning EBD?

The team I expect to benefit most from this rule change is Williams, as I understand it they have had trouble getting their system working to the same level as most other teams, thus with it gone they might be faster relative to the competition.

 

[Josephiah]

As usual I will adopt my "wait and see philosophy" on this.

The most sensible policy on most occasions!

Doesn't help with the Fantasy F1 unfortunately!

 

[Mryzyz]

What do I win?

 

[sushifiesta]

Well it looks like that, from the little evidence we have so far, McLaren have been the worse affected team. It's difficult to know for sure due to the changeable conditions but they were well off the pace yesterday.

I was just thinking back to pre-season testing and how bad it was looking for them - many were expecting a repeat of 2009 with McLaren starting off in the midfied. Now, what changed between pre-season testing and Melbourne - they introduecd a Red Bull style exhaust/blown diffuser layout.

Is it possible then that without the exhaust blown diffuser the MP4-26 is distinctly average?

 

[landogeorgelewis1]

Holey Smokes, never even gave Webber a thought at getting pole position for this race, but was almost right in my prediction Vettel does start on the front row yet again. TBH if he's off the line before Webber today then i think he'll run and hide for the afternoon up front on his lonesome.