F1 Aero FRIC

[johnny comelately]

Regarding Mercedes, does anyone think that a FRIC system between front and rear aero downforce is being used?

[Tim.Wright]

In an effort to close the only remaining slight avenue where F1 development may have crossed over into production cars, front to rear connections in the suspension have been banned from this year.

[johnny comelately]

In an effort to close the only remaining slight avenue where F1 development may have crossed over into production cars, front to rear connections in the suspension have been banned from this year.

Yes,but what i meant was on the aero downforce

[Tim.Wright]

I think you need to explain what you mean first. Aerodynamics are already heavily related front to rear...

[bhall II]

Regarding Mercedes, does anyone think that a FRIC system between front and rear aero downforce is being used?

Yes. They're called chassis.

[johnny comelately]

Regarding Mercedes, does anyone think that a FRIC system between front and rear aero downforce is being used?

Yes. They're called chassis.

http://i.imgur.com/dYmuxj9.jpg

the chassis acts as the lever regarding downforce between the front and rear giving changing balance.
Occam's razor

[bhall II]

It was a joke.

Like Tim, I'm not really sure what your question seeks.

[johnny comelately]

It was a joke.

Like Tim, I'm not really sure what your question seeks.

what i "seek" is any opinions on whether or not Mercedes could be linking the front and rear wing downforces to manipulate those downforces to provide a chassis tuning area/path .
this could stop finicky balance issues that seem to be a major area of setup problems.
Front and Rear Inter-Connected Downforce. dynamically.
is it possible?
how could it work? I could imagine interconnecting for transference pneumatically or hydraulically between the mounts.
is it legal (FIA legal)

[domh245]

Are you asking if the front/rear wings are movable during the race? If so, they definitely aren't as that would count as a movable aerodynamic device, something that is explicitly forbidden by the techinal regulations. FRIC suspension was disallowed because seemingly some teams were using it to generate an effect similar to moving the wings

[wesley123]

while teams flex their wings at speed, movable aero isn't legal. Neither is active aero(with the exception of DRS)

[olefud]

I suppose the front and rear suspension stiffness (damper jacking?) could be set to change the vehicle pitch with, for instance, speed thereby altering the angle of attack of the aero features. But doing so at other than a rather low frequency would be a bit of a challenge.

[Writinglife]

I suppose the front and rear suspension stiffness (damper jacking?) could be set to change the vehicle pitch with, for instance, speed thereby altering the angle of attack of the aero features. But doing so at other than a rather low frequency would be a bit of a challenge.

Surely that comes into the realms of active suspsension?

[Tim.Wright]

If there is no powered actuator anywhere then the system isn't active.

3rd springs are already used to control the ride attitude response to downforce. So technically, they should be banned under the same interpretation which banned mass dampers and FRIC systems last year.

[Writinglife]

If there is no powered actuator anywhere then the system isn't active.

3rd springs are already used to control the ride attitude response to downforce. So technically, they should be banned under the same interpretation which banned mass dampers and FRIC systems last year.

To me, any system that's placed on the car purely to adjust/change/affect the attitude of the car in relation to the downforce would constitute "active" suspension.


Personally, I'm all for bringing back real development wars into the sport. Keep the budgets capped, so Team Z can't have Toys A-Z, but spend their money on Toys A-C whilst Team Y spends their money on D-F. So far Mercedes, rhey might spend all their money on engines (ERS, Turbo design, ICE design) whilst Ferrari might spend their money on Aero parts (Wings, winglets, coke bottling etc and not so much on engine) whilst McLaren want to play about with a little of both etc.. Williams could then pick up their Active Suspension technology etc..

If you allowed freedom in tech development, but maintained a grip on budgets, you could prevent one team from acquiring all the tech available, and it might just even the field up

[Tim.Wright]

If there is no powered actuator anywhere then the system isn't active.

3rd springs are already used to control the ride attitude response to downforce. So technically, they should be banned under the same interpretation which banned mass dampers and FRIC systems last year.

To me, any system that's placed on the car purely to adjust/change/affect the attitude of the car in relation to the downforce would constitute "active" suspension.

The definition of an active system is pretty clear. In engineering/physics terms, active means something which adds energy to a system. Therefore, if you have only passive springs and dampers - regardless of how they're interconnected, and how it affects your ride height and/or aero - your system is passive.