Williams/Virgin behind EBD off throttle ban.

[WhiteBlue]

[...]

On topic, why do we not consider to take Whiting's explanation at face value? After all it makes sense. As James Allan has demonstrated the FiA has often used the Spanish GP as a date to initiate a clamp down for the next year. The rules for 2012 will be fixed in June and they are usually giving it some weeks to settle and sort itself out. So logically they had to start nagging the teams at the time they did.

It's in the nature of the process that you don't get these things sorted out overnight. I don't see why Merc would be particularly keen to have the rules one way or another. It makes a hell of a lot more sense for those teams to be concerned who are still in the process of committing much money and resources to optimize the exhaust. All Merc teams are probably on their second or third iteration. On top both McLaren and Merc are fully financed and would not have any problems with funding an aggressive development program.

My view is that the conflict developed by chance and there wasn't much of a conspiracy story in it. The players are just acting according to their particular position on this issue.

Generally I agree that the FiA should stop the trick engine software now. It only wastes a lot of fuel in order to raise cornering speeds. That isn't very desirable. The big teams are through with the basic development and banning the tech now will not have a big effect on the championship. It may hurt Red Bull more than any other team but then they are so much ahead that it would probably suit the championship fight if they suffer a bit.

[myurr]

I'd support the ban but for a completely different reason - the more I think about the exhaust overrun, the more it feels like a driver aid to me. It's effectively software that means the driver doesn't need to control the car, as the car is automatically applying throttle to keep itself balanced.

I'm not against progress, but I like the cars to be difficult and challenging to drive so that the driver can make a real difference.

[marcush.]

i think it´s as simply as threatening to file a protest agaist the fuel injected overrun condition that triggered the activity.
FIA is aware of their public reception with the flexy wing issue and felt the need not to run into a protest át raceweekend scenario..with possibly all top teams excluded from the results..
I think on ground of this the top teams demanded clarification from FIA-will they get kicked out when a protest is logged or not-so when Whiting went as far as -it could be a possible disqualification..then action was needed -ending in the rule change-but as the teams don´t want this ,it was publicised and put under consideration for the next weeks-robbing the smaller teams the possibility to file a protest..

[speedsense]

With fear of getting abused for voicing an opinion without a reliable "source", I think speedsense's scenario is a bit over the top, but Mercedes earlier throwing their weight behind Williams asking for a "clarification" I hold far more likely.

The FIA issuing a mid-season technology ban to the benefit of Cosworth and the minnows, naah...

No source, not over the top for science fiction.

Though what is interesting, and not science fiction, is Whitings comments on competitors protesting and the 1998 Brazil brake issues with Mclaren, protested by Ferrari and banned after Brazil.. .... a period of time with another dominant Newey car. Just thought I'd point that out.

[Fil]

..the more I think about the exhaust overrun, the more it feels like a driver aid to me. It's effectively software that means the driver doesn't need to control the car, as the car is automatically applying throttle to keep itself balanced.

I'd never thought of this & it's turned my opinion completely around now. =D>

I'd be happy to see off-throttle overrun strictly limited by the FIA, and as soon as possible (even if it hurts the team I'm most fond of this season, Renault, the most).

[alelanza]

...It's effectively software that means the driver doesn't need to control the car, as the car is automatically applying throttle to keep itself balanced.
...

Do you mean it actively varies exhaust flow to balance the car? or that it's just a constant flow that in itself balances the car?

[myurr]

...It's effectively software that means the driver doesn't need to control the car, as the car is automatically applying throttle to keep itself balanced.
...

Do you mean it actively varies exhaust flow to balance the car? or that it's just a constant flow that in itself balances the car?

I have no idea if it's active but I'd like to think that it's just a constant flow that in itself balances the car by producing a more constant level of rear downforce. If it were actually active then that would be wrong on a whole new level.

But even in that constant flow guise it is still adjusting the cars throttle independently of driver input so as to balance the car, something that doesn't sit well with me.

[WillerZ]

I am inclined to agree with myurr.

The drivers have the option, however unattractive it is, of using the clutch to (partially) disconnect the engine from the wheels which would allow them to use the throttle under braking and turn-in without the usual side effect of accelerating the rotation of the rear wheels.

That's difficult, error-prone, and would probably chew up the clutch of a current F1 car within 20 laps; so I can see why the teams prefer to use an engine map to get the job done. For me it feels somewhere between seamless-shift gearboxes and traction-control in terms of what it removes from the driver's skill and what it removes from the drivetrain's workload.

Hope this makes sense – please go easy if it doesn't as this is my first contribution to the forum after lurking for about a year.

[gridwalker]

...It's effectively software that means the driver doesn't need to control the car, as the car is automatically applying throttle to keep itself balanced.
...

Do you mean it actively varies exhaust flow to balance the car? or that it's just a constant flow that in itself balances the car?

They'd never get away with running an active system through the SECU : it will just be adjusting the fuel flow using a preset mapping to smooth over the fluctuation in the gas flow when releasing the throttle.

[xpensive]

What I don't get technically is how you can get a gas-flow though the engine with a closed throttle, or is it not closed?

Can anyone xplain how this works when you're "off-thottle" and why it would be so difficult for Cosworth to develop?

[andrew]

What I don't get technically is how you can get a gas-flow though the engine with a closed throttle, or is it not closed?

Can anyone xplain how this works when you're "off-thottle" and why it would be so difficult for Cosworth to develop?

I had it explain to me yesterday by an engineer. I think it is possibly along the similar lines of an afterburner with exhaust gasses being channeled onto the diffuser, I think. I might be speaking to them later today so will ask them about their theory again, if I remember.

[Fil]

What I don't get technically is how you can get a gas-flow though the engine with a closed throttle, or is it not closed?

Can anyone xplain how this works when you're "off-thottle" and why it would be so difficult for Cosworth to develop?

Yep, the accelerator pedal does not directly relate to the throttle body's position. The pedal now just specifically controls what amount of hp/torque is wanted by the driver. The engine map is designed to provide this, whilst at the same time maintaining a desired exhaust flow.


Cosworth's problem? They obviously don't want to spend the money on fine-tuning it for each of its teams' specific solutions.

[andrew]

Have you seen this Q&A with Charlie Whiting on Planet F1?

http://www.planet-f1.com/driver/3213/69 ... ie-Whiting

Looks like the FIA were happy with the EBD when they were in their infancy but now that the system has matured they areconcerned.

[xpensive]

What I don't get technically is how you can get a gas-flow though the engine with a closed throttle, or is it not closed?

Can anyone xplain how this works when you're "off-thottle" and why it would be so difficult for Cosworth to develop?

I had it explain to me yesterday by an engineer. I think it is possibly along the similar lines of an afterburner with exhaust gasses being channeled onto the diffuser, I think. I might be speaking to them later today so will ask them about their theory again, if I remember.

I suspected as much myself, but in order to burn fuel you need oxygen, how do you get that when you are off-throttle?

[TzeiTzei]

What I don't get technically is how you can get a gas-flow though the engine with a closed throttle, or is it not closed?

Can anyone xplain how this works when you're "off-thottle" and why it would be so difficult for Cosworth to develop?

The throttle isn't closed. When the driver goes off-throttle, the computer takes over and retards the ignitions so that the fuel burns in the exhaust. I believe this technique has been used in rally cars for a long time. They need the exhaust gases to keep the turbo spinning to reduce the turbo lag. I don't know why Cosworth haven't done this. Didn't Williams have an EBD last year? One could have thought that they had developed something like this already.

edit: google anti-lag. That's the system they use in turbocharged engines, and i think it's pretty similar to what we have in F1 now.