Red Bull and Lotus to protest Mercedes f-duct

[flickster]

If you protest something then you should get a judgement on why it is or is not legal, not merely an 'opinion' which Charlie has form for changing.

Well they can't go into much detail for obvious reasons. If not that would be an easy way for teams to get information on how a rival car works.

[banibhusan]

Okay. Just an honest question. Isn't it true that during the designing process, if any team comes up with anything really innovative and out of the box, they usually clarify with the FIA whether it can be implemented within the spirit of the rules?

If it's true then FIA would have been aware much earlier what MB was up to and could have banned it then itself.

[SiLo]

I find it highly ironic that it's Red Bull that are doing a lot of the complaining. Especially considering their dubious front wing over the last couple of seasons.

I hope it gets deemed legal because I always find it interesting when other teams copy an idea and come up with their own versions. It makes the sport much more interesting.

[xpensive]

Perhaps appointing an engineer with design xperience from formula one as FIA's Technical Director would be a good start?

The problem with Whiting is that his primary merit for his position as FIA's "Technical delegate" is to have been chief mechanic
for MrE's Brabham team in the 80s, without any design engineering xperience, which makes his opinion just an opinion.

This might also xplain his obvious problems with understanding the flexing front wings and a relevant method to test them?

[hollus]

I know, I already posted something very similar in a very similar thread...

The system is not driver operated, doesnt move, remains the same and doesnt change shape or from before or after DRS activation.

Exactly the same could be said of the 2010 style F-ducts.

It works once DRS is activated yes.

And again. Using DRS is optional. It is not like it happens automatically every time you shift. In quali, or while in the DRS zone in the race, the driver has the option to activate it or not, and decides when to close it again. That is not passive.

But that is neither here nor there as the genius of the system lies in Mercedes placing it in the location they did.

So, placing the key hole right behind an overextended accelerator pedal would make it legal?

This is no different from 2010 except in the presence of an intermediate mechanical link.

[beelsebob]

And again. Using DRS is optional. It is not like it happens automatically every time you shift. In quali, or while in the DRS zone in the race, the driver has the option to activate it or not, and decides when to close it again. That is not passive.

The sense Charlie is seeing it as passive in is that the driver has no choice whether they activate this system or not. They can activate the DRS, and in doing so must get this system with it. They have no ability to say "I want the DRS and not this" and they have no ability to say "I want this and not the DRS". So they have active control over the DRS, this responds passively to the state of the DRS.

[hollus]

So I guess the steering wheel has a "F-duct+DRS" button? They both activate together, every time.

But I see what you mean.

[flickster]

I know, I already posted something very similar in a very similar thread...

But that is neither here nor there as the genius of the system lies in Mercedes placing it in the location they did.

So, placing the key hole right behind an overextended accelerator pedal would make it legal?

This is no different from 2010 except in the presence of an intermediate mechanical link.

Sorry but it is totally different to the 2010 F-Duct.

The 2010 F-Duct was operated by the driver Directly. The only reason for the driver putting his glove over the hole was to operate the F-duct.

The MGP "F-Duct" system is not operated by the driver, it is operated as a secondary function of the DRS wing opening. The driver is operating the DRS wing when he presses the button, not the F-duct, very different to the 2010 F-duct systems which were being, again, directly activated by the drivers hand.

In summary the DRS wing is operating the F-duct as a secondary function, not the driver.

You could argue this solution has zero driver involvement and purely works as a 100% passive system reacting to the change of air flow caused by the DRS flap opening. The function of the button pressed by the driver is to open the DRS not to activate the F-duct, that's a by-product just like a by-product of the driver pressing the accelerator pedal is an increase in downforce in most areas of the car due to the higher air flow generated by the increased speed of the car, does that mean now that the drivers can not press the accelerator?

Regarding placing a hole under say the accelerator pedal of the driver - It is not the same number of processes detached from the driver

Your Pedal example:
Driver > Pedal > F-Duct opening.
(1.Driver operates Pedal, 2.Pedal covers F-duct opening.)

MGP DRS F-duct:
Driver > Button > DRS > F-Duct opening.
(1.Driver operates DRS button, 2.DRS Button activates DRS flap, 3.DRS flap exposes F-duct.)

Without getting into a whole heap of debates on how that is different and the implications of the differences, simply showing you that the MGP solution is more detached from the driver than a hole under the accelerator pedal is and nothing like the way the 2010 solution was activated regarding driver involvement.

[e30ernest]

From Ross Brawn:

Obviously we kept the FIA informed with what we were doing. They physically checked the system on Wednesday and they were happy with it. Other teams aren't quite so happy and are seeking clarification. Obviously if the FIA are not happy with it we will change our position. If the FIA continue to be happy with it we will continue to use it. We're happy with it.

There were some stories there were going to be some protests and I think that would be very unfortunate. It's not really the way to resolve these issues - we've never done that. A protest after qualifying or after the race is not very pleasant because of course it can be done on a Thursday or can be done on a Friday when it's less critical and the system can be turned off. Protests after we've been through qualifying are a bit unpleasant and certainly not something we would intentionally do. I hope it doesn't deteriorate to that.

But it's a new and novel system, we've presented our case and the FIA are comfortable they've given it the green light, but someone might come up with something we haven't thought about and we'll have to reconsider the whole thing. But so far we're happy with what we've got.

From ESPNF1

[Agerasia]

As far as I understand, Mercedes DID seek clarification from the FIA from the very start.
EDIT: As posted above

[munudeges]

If it's activated by the DRS in any way then this is not a passive system. There is no way it can be. Whiting has already said he ruled against such systems operated via the suspension and that doesn't have any driver activation anywhere.

He's like a candle in the wind......

[strad]

Driver > Button > DRS > F-Duct opening.
(1.Driver operates DRS button, 2.DRS Button activates DRS flap, 3.DRS flap exposes F-duct.)

Perfect..It's not direct, it's a by product.

[Agerasia]

Driver > Button > DRS > F-Duct opening.
(1.Driver operates DRS button, 2.DRS Button activates DRS flap, 3.DRS flap exposes F-duct.)

Perfect..It's not direct, it's a by product.

I agree, it's not driver operated, it's an indirect result of the DRS being used.

[Morteza]

What's with all this complain? What advantage has Mercedes got from this system that other team want it to be banned? Lotus developed a system which was banned by FIA. They want it to be the same case with Mercedes. Grosjean ended up up third in qualifying. Does that not satisfy Mr. Boullier?

[thearmofbarlow]

So I guess the steering wheel has a "F-duct+DRS" button? They both activate together, every time.

But I see what you mean.

If you remove the DRS system this can still work on its own. That is why it is not a moveable aero device. There are zero moving parts to the system itself. It just so happens that they placed it in an area that is obscured by the endplate of their DRS wing.