FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

Discuss the sport you love with other motorsport fans

Formula One related discussion.
#260089
ESPN F1:

The FIA has told the teams that the practice of using exhaust gases to blow diffusers off-throttle will be banned from the British Grand Prix onwards.

Initially the FIA wanted to ban teams using exhaust gases off-throttle from the Spanish Grand Prix last month, but agreed to delay enforcing the ban after the teams highlighted cost and logistical problems. However, it wrote to teams on Saturday morning to inform them that it will implement the ban from next month's race at Silverstone, and apply even more strict restrictions in 2012.

The ban will apply to two types of diffuser blowing: 'hot blowing' and 'cold blowing'. 'Hot blowing' occurs when fuel is still forced through the engine off-throttle in order to ignite and then increase energy in the exhaust, with complex engine mapping stopping the engine from sending further drive to the wheels. 'Cold blowing' occurs when the throttle stays open while the fuel valves are closed, so no fuel is ignited and only cold gases are forced out of the exhausts.

The effect of both types is an increase in downforce at the rear of the car, with 'hot blowing' the more effective method. While all of the teams currently blow the diffuser, Sauber, Toro Rosso, Williams, Virgin and HRT only practice 'cold blowing', meaning that it is the leading teams that will feel the biggest impact. As of 2012, however, the FIA want to outlaw all blown diffusers and move the exhaust exits to the very rear of the car, preventing gases from having any effect on downforce.

The reason for the ban is the FIA is unhappy that 'hot blowing' is a waste of fuel, and believe that blown diffusers in general are making use of moving parts of the engine to influence aerodynamics, and therefore infringe a regulation against moveable aerodynamic devices. Williams technical director Sam Michael told Autosport that the Technical Working Group would be meeting on Thursday in order to agree on how it will implement the FIA's rules.

"The FIA has made its position very clear," Michael said. "They want to talk about the fine details on Thursday, but what Charlie [Whiting, FIA technical delegate] is saying is that hot blowing is banned and cold blowing is banned from the Silverstone GP onwards. For 2012, the exhaust system must exit behind the rear wheel centre line, actually 330mm behind, so right out the back of the diffuser.

"That means there cannot be any exhaust influence on the diffuser. That is what the FIA has clarified and then Thursday is about implementation."

Mercedes team principal Ross Brawn told the BBC that it would be difficult for the teams to prevent the ban coming in to force, and that the biggest difference would be noticed in qualifying.

"Unless the teams can show a definite major problem with the approach that means it's not feasible, it will go ahead," Brawn said. "In qualifying, it means a lap-time deficit of half to one second, although our race modes aren't going to be that different."

Brazilian newspaper O Estado de S.Paulo quoted Red Bull technical boss Adrian Newey as admitting he is angry.

"I agree with rule changes in the middle of a championship for good reason, like safety," he said. "But this is not the case. It's absurd."

FIA president Jean Todt said last week he is resolute because sophisticated 'hot' exhaust blowing is a "needless waste of fuel".

Renault boss Eric Boullier said: "We designed our car for this principle and already last year it was being used by some teams. We passed the technical inspection at the beginning of the championship. To give it up now would probably compromise our ability to achieve good results this year."





I reckon RB will be hurting the most in quali, which means they/SV won't get those poles as easily anymore and in turn will have a harder time during the race. Could make this season a mirror of JB's 2009 championship: first third dominance, then not anymore with few points and towards the end maybe a bit of a recovery to secure the title?
#260093
It's stupid that they can bring in such a big rule change mid season.

think of the damage it will have to the Renault, with the front facing exhausts. The car was basically designed around this loop hole and this sort of change will have a huge impact.
#260094
It's stupid that they can bring in such a big rule change mid season.

think of the damage it will have to the Renault, with the front facing exhausts. The car was basically designed around this loop hole and this sort of change will have a huge impact.

Hence AN is fuming about it as RB are in a similar situation.
#260099
I reckon RB will be hurting the most in quali, which means they/SV won't get those poles as easily anymore and in turn will have a harder time during the race. Could make this season a mirror of JB's 2009 championship: first third dominance, then not anymore with few points and towards the end maybe a bit of a recovery to secure the title?


i generally don't subscribe to conspiracy theories, but i tend to think this is the main reason for the change. If it really was for fuel saving or being too close to moving aero parts, they should have banned it before the season altogether.
#260102
I reckon RB will be hurting the most in quali, which means they/SV won't get those poles as easily anymore and in turn will have a harder time during the race. Could make this season a mirror of JB's 2009 championship: first third dominance, then not anymore with few points and towards the end maybe a bit of a recovery to secure the title?


i generally don't subscribe to conspiracy theories, but i tend to think this is the main reason for the change. If it really was for fuel saving or being too close to moving aero parts, they should have banned it before the season altogether.

Agreed - they should have banned it before the season or waited until the new season.
A mid-season change of this magnitude smells.
#260109
What I find interesting is that the FiA has openly admitted that they have know about this breach of the rules for a long time, but has only now decided to act on it.

Ferrari's gurney flap is immediately banned, Sauber banned immediately in Australia, but, when it comes to this breach, for some reason, the FiA decides to give teams a huge chunk of the season to continue breaking the rule, to keep their unfair advantage, and then, eventually, the FiA will react.

Seems very inconsistent to me.
#260116
Regulation changes in the middle of the season are insane. It's unfair.


As I understand it, there will be no change to the regulations. Remember, to change the regulations you would need the WMSC to meet and agree on a proposed change that would then need to be submitted to the General Assembly - which doesn't meet until ~October.

From the quotes from Charlie Whiting and Sam Michael (on the letter sent to the teams from the FiA) the overrun is being banned under the currently existing Technical Regulation 3.15.
#260121
Regulation changes in the middle of the season are insane. It's unfair.


As I understand it, there will be no change to the regulations. Remember, to change the regulations you would need the WMSC to meet and agree on a proposed change that would then need to be submitted to the General Assembly - which doesn't meet until ~October.

From the quotes from Charlie Whiting and Sam Michael (on the letter sent to the teams from the FiA) the overrun is being banned under the currently existing Technical Regulation 3.15.


Well, yes...and no. As Renault mentioned (and other teams surely did), they submitted their tech specs for verification and they were approved.
#260123
Regulation changes in the middle of the season are insane. It's unfair.


As I understand it, there will be no change to the regulations. Remember, to change the regulations you would need the WMSC to meet and agree on a proposed change that would then need to be submitted to the General Assembly - which doesn't meet until ~October.

From the quotes from Charlie Whiting and Sam Michael (on the letter sent to the teams from the FiA) the overrun is being banned under the currently existing Technical Regulation 3.15.


Well, yes...and no. As Renault mentioned (and other teams surely did), they submitted their tech specs for verification and they were approved.


I see your point, however, F1 has chosen not to run on a pre-approval basis. All teams submit chassis at the start of the year for homolgation, but, in F1, that does not mean the car is approved. In the same way Ferrari could argue their Gurney flap was "approved" on Thursday when the car was presented for scrutineering. Ferrari's flexi wing in 2006 was approved many times, and passed every test at every race - but was still banned mid-season.

I just don't understand why the FiA are deliberately dragging their heels on acting on this one. On the one hand they are saying they know it breaches the existing rule (3.15) and yet they seem content to let teams, that are gaining an advantage from the breach continue to do so - very inconsistent implementation of the rules.
Last edited by spankyham on 12 Jun 11, 14:15, edited 1 time in total.
#260131
#1. TR 3.15 forbids any component that uses driver movement as a means of altering the aerodynamic characteristics of the car. I would argue that having EBD and not using exhaust overrun mapping violates this rule because, with 'standard' mapping, when the driver lifts, it alters the aerodynamic characteristics of the car. Exhaust overrun mapping reduces the changes to the aero properties of the car caused by the driver's throttle input.

The rule does not specify this "altering" must be to the driver's advantage, or that it must increase downforce. Therefore any driver movement that decreases downforce also is in violation of TR 3.15. Since the driver causes considerablymore alteration to the aerodynamic characteristics of the car by lifting off the throttle in a non-overrun car, they are far more in violation of TR 3.15 than those that are so equipped.

#2. The bug up Gene Tote's arse is that the exhaust overrun mapping burns additional fuel strictly for the purpose of creating downforce.

Hullo, ...hullo? Anybody home? Think, McFly, ...think!

[youtube]kh9PYtmVybU[/youtube]

Wings work by exactly the same principle. Lift is directly proportional to drag. No wing can create downforce unless it also creates drag, which means the car must burn additional fuel strictly for the purpose of driving that wing through the air and causing it to generate downforce.

#3. As I pointed out in another thread, using exhaust gas pressure to create additional downforce is neither a new concept nor unique to F1.

Image

By this absurd interpretation, all the teams need do to be in violation of 3.15, whether they use the EBD or not, is to incline the exhaust discharge 1° above horizontal.

#4. HRT have come to Canada with a new exhaust blown diffuser. Now would you suppose they have done it half-arsed, or are they also using exhaust overrun mapping? Currently, Virgin are the sole remaining team without an EBD. And if Richard Branson weren't such a miserly crumudgeon, they'd have it too.

Why are the FIA talking about banning something that ALL the teams obviously would prefer to be using?
#260132
Just to be clear on Article 3.15 of the Tech Regs. As it relates to this case, in summary it states this:-
"any specific part of the car influencing its aerodynamic performance .... must remain immobile"

What the FiA are saying is that a part of the car "influencing its aeros" must remain immobile. The FiA accepts that the engine, in its normal use, is to drive the car - therefore it's purpose is accepted as not an aero influence. However, when a team uses the engine overrun it is changing the purpose of the engine for that period of time (clear). Now the engine, which is moving, has a purpose of influencing the aeros - against the rules.

My gripe is not whether the FiA interpretation of the rule is right or wrong - my gripe is that they have "believed" that it is a breach of the rules and they have held this belief for a long time. So, if they are supposed to be impartial adjudicators of the rules, why haven't they acted against the teams that are benefiting from the breach - as the FiA sees it? My gripe is the FiA's willingness to act without delay sometimes, and on other occasions, just wait and let the teams continue to benefit from the breach. For me its completely wrong for the FiA to give this preferential treatment to some teams.

I fully respect that any team that disagrees with the FiA's ruling, has the right to challenge, and perhaps they will win a challenge and prove the FiA wrong, but, that's up to any team to decide if they felt they had a strong enough case to argue in favour of the engine overruns.
#260778
Come on now you can't let them introduce turbo inline 4's or 6clys and allows gimmicks like this to run rampant. It is a total waste of fuel. I understand going :green: should have no place here, but it does, and I have to live it , so it makes sense. Besides it'll make for interesting races :D
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 15

See our F1 related articles too!