Clicky

Jump to content

Archived

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

tifosi too!

Mass Dampers Is Illegal

Recommended Posts

Uhh...yes and no. I'm sure Symmonds and Renault have the same bias towards their best interests, so in that you are correct (have a cookie). You are woefully inept at understanding what constitutes suspension. If my simplistic explanation went over your head then I'm not sure how to educate you. Any idiot could understand what I was saying. The fact that you missed it is telling....
onlty an idiot will call a "damper inside a wing as "suspension"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

onlty an idiot will call a "damper inside a wing as "suspension"

My friend, I am sorry for calling you an idiot. I am also sorry for insulting the educational system of India. Cav p!ssed me off so I decided to push a few of his buttons. I am truly sorry for that.

Now as to the mass dampers, I'll try one more time.

There are two issues getting debated here and they are all mixed-up.

Renault's front-end 'mass' dampers are explained in Ctrl's posted image:

0,,333774,00.jpg

What it's describing is considered by all engineers as 'suspension'. Suspension is anything that compensates for the vertical movement of a car. That definition clearly fits what Renault is using as mass dampers. The FIA were correct in saying that mass dampers affect the aero of a car. They do. There are also many other suspension parts that affect the aero of a car as well. My point was that singling out the Renault front end mass dampers by the FIA was ridiculous as you could also single out the wishbone shape.

Now to the broader issues at hand. The FIA are concerned about this technology expanding. I state that it should not expand and I agree that the FIA should ban the use of any mass damper not directly connected to the suspension, as the front-end Renault mass dampers were.

Narain, do you honestly believe that my technical understanding of the Renault front-end mass damper is incorrect? Please, explain your take on Renault's front-end mass dampers only. Once I understand what you are thinking, perhaps the rest of what you are saying will make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Narain, do you honestly believe that my technical understanding of the Renault front-end mass damper is incorrect? Please, explain your take on Renault's front-end mass dampers only. Once I understand what you are thinking, perhaps the rest of what you are saying will make sense.
this is precisely my point.mclaren have spent a year developing their zero keel suspension and find out renault have compensated for the aero gains by using a mass damper .now my point is the mass damper Perse does not come under the category of "Suspension".a particular exception could be the just that "AN EXCEPTION".but can the FIA allow the exception and ban all trhe other mass dampers :eusa_think:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
this is precisely my point.mclaren have spent a year developing their zero keel suspension and find out renault have compensated for the aero gains by using a mass damper .now my point is the mass damper Perse does not come under the category of "Suspension".a particular exception could be the just that "AN EXCEPTION".but can the FIA allow the exception and ban all trhe other mass dampers :eusa_think:

Ah, now we make progress. Yes, a mass damper can be used on areas other than the suspension, I agree with you there. Ban those.

I think the FIA should have made a rule that a mass damper can only be used if it physically connects to a suspension piece and reacts to the wheel's movement only. This would have been fair, in my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny how every team that don't need the damper's or couldnt get them to work as well have been quoted to support the ban even though none of the teams could truely admit they understood the FIA using such simple thinking for a complex subject :P

One thing good came from this atleast. My respect has gone from high to very high for Pat Symonds now because he has been the most geuine person in the whole pit throughout all this. Hope he follow's Alonso to McLaren.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Funny how every team that don't need the damper's or couldnt get them to work as well have been quoted to support the ban even though none of the teams could truely admit they understood the FIA using such simple thinking for a complex subject :P

One thing good came from this atleast. My respect has gone from high to very high for Pat Symonds now because he has been the most geuine person in the whole pit throughout all this. Hope he follow's Alonso to McLaren.

Symonds and Bell to McLaren :thbup:

But I'm afraid Symonds is pondering putting his boots on the shelf. But, if Darth Dennis coughs up enough money I guess he (Pat) might get other ideas :) And now that Banesto looks a posible suitor I guess money is of no hinderance (not like they where short funded before :lol: ).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

McLaren Complaint Led to 'Mass Damper' Banning

Bernie Ecclestone has expressed surprise at the FIA's mid-season banning of the Renault 'mass damper' innovation.

The F1 supremo called the governing body's decision, and the subsequent verdict of the Court of Appeal, 'difficult to understand', in an interview with Premiere.

''Renault used the system last year and also this year,'' 75-year-old Ecclestone remarked, ''and suddenly McLaren write a letter and (it) is gone.

''I'm not sure the decision should have been made in the middle of the season.

''The FIA should have banned it at the end of last year, if it is illegal.''

its getting interesting!

actually thought it was ferrari who would have done it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting... Obviously Mclaren dont want the number "1" on their cars for next season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
McLaren Complaint Led to 'Mass Damper' Banning

Bernie Ecclestone has expressed surprise at the FIA's mid-season banning of the Renault 'mass damper' innovation.

The F1 supremo called the governing body's decision, and the subsequent verdict of the Court of Appeal, 'difficult to understand', in an interview with Premiere.

''Renault used the system last year and also this year,'' 75-year-old Ecclestone remarked, ''and suddenly McLaren write a letter and (it) is gone.

''I'm not sure the decision should have been made in the middle of the season.

''The FIA should have banned it at the end of last year, if it is illegal.''

its getting interesting!

actually thought it was ferrari who would have done it

I don't get this at all. I thought McLaren was to help Renault get the title so that they could secure Fernando's second title.

If anyone would have complained it surely must have been Ferrari. Do you have a source for this?

Interesting... Obviously Mclaren dont want the number "1" on their cars for next season.

Yeah, makes no sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, makes no sense.

Indeed, I would still say its a certain red team that are the culprits!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting... Obviously Mclaren dont want the number "1" on their cars for next season.

Well they would have to win the constructors championship to have the #1 on their car....

So much for the anti- Ferrari conspiritors :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well they would have to win the constructors championship to have the #1 on their car....

The world champion carries the number 1 with him

I will never forget the 1997 Arrows sporting the number "1".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't get this at all. I thought McLaren was to help Renault get the title so that they could secure Fernando's second title.

Nice one Ctrl300, i forgot about it. Maybe Mclaren's inquiry started last year bud, when they first started inspecting it????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nice one Ctrl300, i forgot about it. Maybe Mclaren's inquiry started last year bud, when they first started inspecting it????

McLaren were probably trying to eliminate Renault's dominance for '07.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
McLaren were probably trying to eliminate Renault's dominance for '07.

Why not do that in the off season. A ban on the mass dampers in early March would probably do Renault more harm, as they would start the new season on the back foot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is FA possably involved in this :eusa_think:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How is FA possably involved in this :eusa_think:

I think they are using the mass dampers to stabilize Fernando's eyebrows, which load heavily in turns, forcing them down into his eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think they are using the mass dampers to stabilize Fernando's eyebrows, which load heavily in turns, forcing them down into his eyes.

:eusa_think:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, the problem with me is I have greater knowledge than you, and most of the posters here. That looks, to you, like I know nothing, but in fact I'm trying like hell to educate you, and others (to no avail). Please do not think that since you are in a second-rate University in a third-world country that you are getting a proper education. You are not. And if you're in a good University, then perhaps you got there under a quota system?

strong words and claims my friend, but i think the forum is no place for such bigotry and arrogance. To claim that you know it all and others are just morons looking up to you for enlightment makes you look very naive and ordinary. you may not have much respect for Cav's opinions and may have apologized to him later, but more than ignorance, its arrogance that drives people away from the forums.

"its better to keep quiet and to be thought of as a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt"...

tone it down my friend, keep it enjoyable for everyone, we all love F1 and we all know the sport to some degree, that is why we come here to discuss F1 with people from around the world. There is no reason to lose sight of that and turn the forums into a shout fest...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
this is precisely my point.mclaren have spent a year developing their zero keel suspension and find out renault have compensated for the aero gains by using a mass damper .now my point is the mass damper Perse does not come under the category of "Suspension".a particular exception could be the just that "AN EXCEPTION".but can the FIA allow the exception and ban all trhe other mass dampers :eusa_think:

Mass Dampers are deemed illegal because

1) they are the mechanical equivalents of the long banned Active suspensions from early 90s. In an active suspension system, the ride height was hydraulically adjusted to keep the car as horizontal as possible for better handling and aerodynamic stability. Mass dampers like hydraulic arms provide the effect of delayed inertia to stablize the chassis under varying mechanical loads, especially on the kerbs. Here are official FIA regulations regarding what constitutes a Suspension device.

"Following the ban on computer-controlled 'active' suspension in the 1990s, all of the Formula One car's suspension functions must be carried out without electronic intervention. The cars feature 'multi-link' suspension front and rear, broadly equivalent to the double wishbone layout of some road cars, with unequal length suspension arms top and bottom to allow the best possible control of the camber angle the wheel takes during cornering. As centrifugal force causes the body to roll, the longer effective radius of the lower suspension arms means that the bottom of the tyre (viewed from ahead) slants out further than the top, vital for maximising the grip yielded by the tyre." - Source Formula1.com

Here are the detailed regulations - my notes are within {} and specific items in BOLD

ARTICLE 10: SUSPENSION AND STEERING SYSTEMS

10.1 Sprung suspension:

10.1.1 Cars must be fitted with sprung suspension. {it say "sprung", not mass}

10.1.2 The suspension system must be so arranged that its response results only from changes in load applied to the wheels. {which implies NO mass compensation to stablize suspension travel AKA active suspension }

10.2 Suspension geometry:

10.2.1 With the steering wheel fixed, the position of each wheel centre and the orientation of its rotation axis must be completely and uniquely defined by a function of its principally vertical suspension travel, save only for the effects of reasonable compliance which does not intentionally provide further degrees of freedom. {the mass dampers provide an additional degree of freedom for the suspension device}

0.2.2 Any powered device which is capable of altering the configuration or affecting the performance of any part of the suspension system is forbidden. {this is the loop hole used to justify mass dampers. Its only say no powered devices to rule out hydraullic suspension devices A.K.A active suspension. It leaves the door open for non powered or mass based devices capable of altering configuration and altering performance}

10.2.3 No adjustment may be made to the suspension system while the car is in motion.

10.3 Suspension members:

10.3.1 The cross-sections of each member of every suspension component must have an aspect ratio no greater than 3.5:1 and be symmetrical about its major axis. All suspension components may however have sections with an aspect ratio greater than 3.5:1, and be nonsymmetrical, provided these are adjacent to their inner and outer attachments and form no more than 25% of the total distance between the attachments of the relevant member.

All measurements will be made perpendicular to a line drawn between the inner and outer attachments of the relevant member.

10.3.2 No major axis of a cross section of a suspension member may subtend an angle greater than 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I guess Puma will continue to ignore this thread as he has no way of proving his "expert" knowledge? B)

I am waiting for your response....

I'm at work so I respond as I can...Long posts take longer...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EDIT: I think that I have already said what I wanted to on this topic. Judge for yourself whether or not I am right or wrong. I really am tired of it.

Stopkidding, I just want to point out that you are quoting suspension regulations (10) but the FIA banned the devices under aerodynamic regulations (article 3.15). Aside from that, good post.

My humblest apologies for my arrogance earlier in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...