Clicky

Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

tifosi too!

Mass Dampers Is Illegal

Recommended Posts

We are lucky to have Matchett. :D He loves both Ferrari and Renault, so his opinion is very fair where they are concerned.

Indeed, hope I manage to get SpeedTV this weekend :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By 'slaughter' do you mean he'll run right into the back of Pedro? That seems likely. Or do you mean 'slaughter' like how Fisico has gotten 'slaughtered' by Alonso..? And I seem to remember that before a wheel nut fell off, Alonso was running pretty near the front...and Fisico was mowing the lawn...so much for your mass damper theory... :D

leave me alone willya... :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While you were typing this, I went back and fixed my post to address tifosi too when I said 'you need to understand how they work'. I figured you would know, Bruce, but maybe not tifosi...sorry for the sloppy communication.

Explanations about mass dampers are on every credible technical F1 website and the common theme is that they are NOT aero and the way they affect the aero is exactly like a piece of suspension would. You are right in saying that the FIA, for whatever reason, want them illegal, so they are illegal. Case closed.

The FIA are still wrong, from an engineering point-of-view. I don't recall what Matchett said, but I'd be surprised if it agreed with the FIA :D

I do know how mass dampers work.Renault admitted that they do have an aerodynamic effect but they stated it was negligible.I don't consider myself able to analyze technically the mass dampers and prove the FIA right or wrong.If you think you are the most qualified person to do it, of all the persons involved in this then its fine by me... :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i am getting mad, Ferrari cant get damperns working right to they ban them.

In a nutshell... YES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome back Cav! Since you've been gone your fellow countryman has continued to drive everyone insane!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Welcome back Cav! Since you've been gone your fellow countryman has continued to drive everyone insane!

:huh: I'm not Norwegian

thanks though :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do know how mass dampers work.Renault admitted that they do have an aerodynamic effect but they stated it was negligible.I don't consider myself able to analyze technically the mass dampers and prove the FIA right or wrong.If you think you are the most qualified person to do it, of all the persons involved in this then its fine by me... :D

It only has an aerodynamic effect because it keeps the nose from bouncing up and down. This has the result of keeping the front wing at an even distance from the ground, providing a more reliable amount of low-pressure under the front wing elements. This, as you probably know, creates downforce.

Mass dampers are simply a weight-system attached to the suspension to prevent the car's tendency to skitter and bounce. They are suspension parts. Are we clear yet? Good. Now if we are banning suspension parts because the affect the aerodynamics on a car, we need to ban the upper and lower wishbones.

EDIT: I was incorrect above, the mass dampers do not attach to the suspension.

Those wishbones are shaped like airfoils, instead of cylinders, to eliminate the drag that exists behind a cylinder. Should we ban them as well, considering they move? Hell, unlike the dampers, the wishbones are actual moving aero-parts because they are actually in the airflow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
snip
its not as "black and white"

when the "mass dampers" (effectively springs) are placed in the "rear" of the car and at an angle to the vertical ,and designed to be rigid upto a certain speed ,they can effectively become "movable aero".that is what the FIA interpreted after they investigated the latest generation of mass dampers .hence the blanket ban (to prevent the notion thatthey are biased)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
its not as "black and white"

when the "mass dampers" (effectively springs) are placed in the "rear" of the car and at an angle to the vertical ,and designed to be rigid upto a certain speed ,they can effectively become "movable aero".that is what the FIA interpreted after they investigated the latest generation of mass dampers .hence the blanket ban (to prevent the notion thatthey are biased)

That is rubbish. Springs and dampers on suspension-travel are not aero, no matter what their position. You could make an argument against them becoming a bit like active-ride suspension, but that's as far as you can go. Anyone who thinks mass dampers are aero-bits just doesn't know what they are talking about and should stick to more simplistic topics, such as what driver behaves better than another -_-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone who thinks mass dampers are aero-bits just doesn't know what they are talking about and should stick to more simplistic topics, such as what driver behaves better than another -_-

Or what 3rd test driver deserves new chances to race again... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Or what 3rd test driver deserves new chances to race again... :rolleyes:

When was the last time you made a worthwhile post, all I've seen for months is poor attempts to make FErrari or Narain jokes. You never quite get to the punchline anyway.

That is rubbish. Springs and dampers on suspension-travel are not aero, no matter what their position. You could make an argument against them becoming a bit like active-ride suspension, but that's as far as you can go. Anyone who thinks mass dampers are aero-bits just doesn't know what they are talking about and should stick to more simplistic topics, such as what driver behaves better than another -_-

They are devices that affect aero, nobody has said they are aero (if somebody here has they're ignorant). The dampers were sprouting up all over, the problem is not just a little damper in the nose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How dare you call Narain a 3rd driver? you are racist, He is the FOURTH driver at williams! :rolleyes:

:P And the one who goes to buy the sodas...

When was the last time you made a worthwhile post, all I've seen for months is poor attempts to make FErrari or Narain jokes. You never quite get to the punchline anyway.

:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When was the last time you made a worthwhile post, all I've seen for months is poor attempts to make FErrari or Narain jokes. You never quite get to the punchline anyway.

They are devices that affect aero, nobody has said they are aero (if somebody here has they're ignorant). The dampers were sprouting up all over, the problem is not just a little damper in the nose.

Sorry my friend, but that is sloppy-sounding. There are many other devices that fit under that description. I object to the sloppy labeling of mass dampers as 'affecting aero' under the cited regulation. In my previous post here, I mentioned that the upper and lower wishbone shapes 'affect aero' to a much greater degree, yet they are deemed legal. This FIA ruling has holes in it big enough for Fat-Monty to jump through.

If the FIA want to ban the things, just ban them, but I dislike the way they insult our intelligence with quoting an aero-regulation. You know as well as I do what that regulation is supposed to cover, and suspension bits are not covered. Flexible wings, yes. Mass dampers, no.

:PAnd the one who goes to buy the sodas...

:rolleyes:

I think that was a punchline... :eusa_think:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry my friend, but that is sloppy-sounding. There are many other devices that fit under that description. I object to the sloppy labeling of mass dampers as 'affecting aero' under the cited regulation. In my previous post here, I mentioned that the upper and lower wishbone shapes 'affect aero' to a much greater degree, yet they are deemed legal. This FIA ruling has holes in it big enough for Fat-Monty to jump through.

If the FIA want to ban the things, just ban them, but I dislike the way they insult our intelligence with quoting an aero-regulation. You know as well as I do what that regulation is supposed to cover, and suspension bits are not covered. Flexible wings, yes. Mass dampers, no.

I think that was a punchline... :eusa_think:

There is no way the mass dampers affect aero as their sole purpose is to create increased wheel contact time over curbs.

BTW Autumn, is there difference between front and rear mass dampers, or are they just the same?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry my friend, but that is sloppy-sounding. There are many other devices that fit under that description. I object to the sloppy labeling of mass dampers as 'affecting aero' under the cited regulation. In my previous post here, I mentioned that the upper and lower wishbone shapes 'affect aero' to a much greater degree, yet they are deemed legal. This FIA ruling has holes in it big enough for Fat-Monty to jump through.

According to the FIA definition, they are not part of the suspension as they are entirely attached to the sprung part of the car.

There is no way the mass dampers affect aero as their sole purpose is to create increased wheel contact time over curbs.

Oh really? Designed them did you? twat.

BTW Autumn, is there difference between front and rear mass dampers, or are they just the same?

How would he know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Calling a twat a twat is acceptable.

Who said :"When was the last time you made a worthwhile post"...?

who?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who said :"When was the last time you made a worthwhile post"...?

who?

All my posts except ones made against a certain person (who shall remain unnamed but hint: he's a twat) are perfectly worthwhile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All my posts except ones made against a certain person (who shall remain unnamed but hint: he's a twat) are perfectly worthwhile.

^_^ If you cant fight with your enemy, join them...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is rubbish. Springs and dampers on suspension-travel are not aero, no matter what their position. You could make an argument against them becoming a bit like active-ride suspension, but that's as far as you can go. Anyone who thinks mass dampers are aero-bits just doesn't know what they are talking about and should stick to more simplistic topics, such as what driver behaves better than another -_-
u clearly seem to think u know every thing ,but the fact is ur understanding of this is flawed. i never said a mass damper is an aero device(let alone movable aero device). but i said when designed in a specific manner it enables the aero "components" to "move " in a certain way and it becomes "EFFECTIVELY "movable aero"

friday preess conference.

NF: Maybe I will start answering the question in a slightly different way and maybe circle back. We’ve not used the mass damper in a race situation. We have, like Gerhard has alluded to, we’ve tested mass damper devices. If the mass damper had not have been banned there’s a very high probability we would have been using a mass damper in this race and beyond because it’s taken some time to develop. I think mass dampers were developing in a way and maybe what you’ve just seen from us this weekend would have fulfilled the worst fears of the FIA in that they were developing in a way that probably wasn’t very fruitful so personally I think the FIA decision is a good one, despite the fact that we spent quite a lot of money developing such devices and were on the verge of using it and it probably would have given us a competitive advantage. But I’m not quite sure what use a mass damper is elsewhere in the world, as it were, and I think we do need to keep an eye on that type of thing, so I support the decision.

As far as is it fair? I don’t subscribe to the theory of manipulating the championship. I think it’s a matter of making the best decision based on the information available at the time and the mass damper device and what it does to a car is very complicated, which is why Gerhard said ‘sometimes it seemed to work, sometimes it doesn’t.’ We had the same problem and we spent a lot of time evolving it. I think it is a complicated thing and I think the best decision was made, based on the information earlier in the year and that subsequently changed, so I think it’s just part of how life evolves. I think it’s similar situation to our situation in 2004 with the so-called FTT, the front torque transfer device, which, actually, when we look back, actually gave us quite a big advantage and because it was towards the end of the season, we voluntarily agreed to drop it but life has to move on and I’m sure Renault will have something else which will take its place and be equally good.

GB: [b]Coming back to your question, I always think yes, it’s going to make a difference for Renault because obviously Renault understood this damper the best[/b] and they had the most experience, they were the furthest in development so unfortunately they are going to suffer with it (the decision). I hope that in the end it doesn’t make the difference (between) winning or not winning the championship, because that would always be hurting for everybody. But at the same time I have to say that if the FIA find out at this stage that in this way it doesn’t fit any more in their understanding of the regulations, then they have to make a decision and I think we all agree that if the FIA comes to a decision, we are going to respect it and we always think it’s not to manipulate the championship, it’s just to have a correct interpretation of the regulations. So let’s hope that the championship is still going to be on and let’s hope that the better one is going to win the championship and not that the damper is going to make the difference. 

JH: I think everything has more or less been said. I’m sure it has some impact on Renault and one can sympathise with their situation but there is a governance process and as with competitors in every sport, in the end you have to respect the decision of the referee or the governing body and they found that in their view, the mass damper is no longer an appropriate device to be used. We haven’t used the device, so I suppose, to some extent, we don’t feel aggrieved because of the decision but in the end, we have to respect the decision of the governing body.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
. Flexible wings, yes. Mass dampers, no.
OH THE IRONY.THIS IS THE POINT I AM GETTING AT ,SO IF SOME TEAM DEVELOPS A "MASS damper" that enables a rear "flexi wing" to flex at high speed then by ur definition it is perfectly legal. :rolleyes2::rolleyes2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...