Formula 1 Pre-season Testing February 2020
Discussion
janesmith1950 said:
Lets hope we're going to get scrathed heads in the engineering departments rather than angry protests in the stewards' office next month...
It's often a case of whether a rival team can replicate the system and find an advantage. If they cannot replicate it, they'll cry foul to the FIA and try and seek either a 'clarification' if they're being polite, or simply say it should be outlawed, using their legal team to quote the relevant regulation clause and their interpretation of it, claiming it's a breach of a technical regulation.It's one area that Mercedes and Red Bull differ in; historically Mercedes see innovation by other teams as a challenge to accept and try to better by educating themselves and learning about it, replicating it (and sometimes improving it). Red Bull, particularly with Ferrari's engine and hybrid development, often go straight for the jugular wanting it either banned, or whatever IP relating to it, made public, or handed over to them to copy (a bit like stealing someone else's homework).
It gets very school playground when they go down the route, and IMO just sounds like they think it unfair that what's often reported by the media as a bunch of disorganised, dumb Italians, have somehow outsmarted Honda's boffins and AMG's scientists.
In respect of the toe in/out adjustment on the Merc - technically it's not illegal in how it operates (depending on interpretation of the regulations about suspension geometry adjustment in motion), but the FIA might want clarification about how secure the steering column is; they often dislike a steering column with travel forwards and backwards when a car's in motion, for safety reasons rather than technical ones.
NFC 85 Vette said:
In respect of the toe in/out adjustment on the Merc - technically it's not illegal in how it operates (depending on interpretation of the regulations about suspension geometry adjustment in motion), but the FIA might want clarification about how secure the steering column is; they often dislike a steering column with travel forwards and backwards when a car's in motion, for safety reasons rather than technical ones.
Safety is an interesting angle. Which is most beneficial to safety: Having the steering wheel not move an inch back and fourth, or having the front wheel more suitably aligned to the track, more of the time? Car makers for decades have looked to toe adjustment as a way of increasing stability. By it's nature, this system is of benefit to Mercedes partly because the car is more stable under differing forces around a track.Beyond safety, lower rolling resistance and subsequent tyre wear and fuel usage on the straights. Sounds very much like a healthy innovation that's well aligned (no pun..) to the efficiency and carbon targets that both FOM and the FIA are in support of. In respect of those targets, this is the sort of development that they should want to see more cars adopt. At very least it makes it a tricky one to outlaw without some serious consideration.
rdjohn said:
I’m not so sure:“Typically an F1 car will be set up so that its front wheels are aligned with ‘toe-out’, which simply means that they splay out at the bottom away from the centre of the car, with the top pointing inwards.“
That sounds like a description of camber not toe out.
“The reason they are set in this way is to create a tiny delay in the front tyres loading up as the car is turned in so that the rear tyres do not have too sudden an instantaneous load placed upon them, which would make the car feel unstable on turn in.“
I always understood it to be the opposite with toe out, though again he still seems to be talking camber though he’s not right about that either.
“However, this means that on the straight the outer edge of the tyre’s tread surface is being heated up more than is the remainder of its width.”
It’s the inner edge that gets hotter.
??
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 20th February 12:32
REALIST123 said:
rdjohn said:
I’m not so sure:“Typically an F1 car will be set up so that its front wheels are aligned with ‘toe-out’, which simply means that they splay out at the bottom away from the centre of the car, with the top pointing inwards.“
That sounds like a description of camber not toe out.
“The reason they are set in this way is to create a tiny delay in the front tyres loading up as the car is turned in so that the rear tyres do not have too sudden an instantaneous load placed upon them, which would make the car feel unstable on turn in.“
I always understood it to be the opposite with toe out, though again he still seem to be talking camber.
“However, this means that on the straight the outer edge of the tyre’s tread surface is being heated up more than is the remainder of its width.”
It’s the inner edge that gets hotter.
??
Those comments are bewildering.
TheDeuce said:
REALIST123 said:
rdjohn said:
I’m not so sure:“Typically an F1 car will be set up so that its front wheels are aligned with ‘toe-out’, which simply means that they splay out at the bottom away from the centre of the car, with the top pointing inwards.“
That sounds like a description of camber not toe out.
“The reason they are set in this way is to create a tiny delay in the front tyres loading up as the car is turned in so that the rear tyres do not have too sudden an instantaneous load placed upon them, which would make the car feel unstable on turn in.“
I always understood it to be the opposite with toe out, though again he still seem to be talking camber.
“However, this means that on the straight the outer edge of the tyre’s tread surface is being heated up more than is the remainder of its width.”
It’s the inner edge that gets hotter.
??
Those comments are bewildering.
One point I would make, in my experience changing toe slightly alters camber, unless there is no caster angle.
Toe may be a steering characteristic but camber is definitely suspension related so altering it this way would seem to be against the rules.
Of course Mercedes may well have figured out a way to alter toe without affecting camber.
I would argue that adjusting toe is a movable aero-affecting device as it is changing the amount of the tyre surface that is going to be present in airflow.
If it was adjusting camber then not so much (apart from maybe taking into account tyre deflection at the contact patch which would be larger therefor less tyre-in-the-airflow if camber is reduced).
It's clever, but they must know they are on if not over the edge of the rules. Renault lost their mass damper years ago as it was classed as a movable device affecting aero and that was less clear cut than this.
PS. The linked article is talking rubbish.
If it was adjusting camber then not so much (apart from maybe taking into account tyre deflection at the contact patch which would be larger therefor less tyre-in-the-airflow if camber is reduced).
It's clever, but they must know they are on if not over the edge of the rules. Renault lost their mass damper years ago as it was classed as a movable device affecting aero and that was less clear cut than this.
PS. The linked article is talking rubbish.
Evercross said:
I would argue that adjusting toe is a movable aero-affecting device as it is changing the amount of the tyre surface that is going to be present in airflow.
That also means you can't turn the steering wheel at all. Which is the joy of this device. It appears it's only moving the same components as used in steering. So either steering is banned, or the device is legal. (Up until a new rule saying steering wheel has to be stationary in that axis.)i'd be surprised if it wasn't legal ...as i'd imagine it will have been ran past the FIA months ago (certainly so, when it was on Charlie Whiting watch)
Mercedes wouldn't just go ahead & proceed with a pretty integral system, without running it past a few people & getting some clarifications first imo
Mercedes wouldn't just go ahead & proceed with a pretty integral system, without running it past a few people & getting some clarifications first imo
angrymoby said:
to me he's explaining it from a top down/ birds eye view of the car ...probably assumes that everyone knows what toe & camber are
The rest of his explanation would still be wrong.
If he assumes that “everyone knows what toe & camber are” why explain what toe out is using a description of camber?
If everybody knew there’d be no need for his ‘explanation’.
Evercross said:
I would argue that adjusting toe is a movable aero-affecting device as it is changing the amount of the tyre surface that is going to be present in airflow.
So arguably does turning the steering wheel in any other car though... This is just changing the angle of the wheels relative to one another, it's not giving them more or less movement overall nor is it altering the influence either wheel can exert on air flow. I think the only reason 'movable aero' is getting bandied around the paddock chatter is because that's the obvious way to make it sound less legal than it is, not because anyone really thinks the chief effect of this setup is an aero benefit.If Mercedes were somehow snagged by the rules, what's the betting they have a 'plan b' more traditional setup they could revert to overnight.
Easiest and most compact way I could envisage it working is simple hydraulic system.
Pull wheel out, drain fluid from track rod ends (effectively), pulls them in slightly and removes the toe out.
Push wheel back in, push fluid back in to track rod ends and spreads the track rods back out.
I'd imagine there's more to it than that though.
Also agree the technical analysis is describing camber, and not very well. Even if it's from a birds eye view, it would have to be from a bird's eye view with the car nose down, a very strange way of describing it :/
Pull wheel out, drain fluid from track rod ends (effectively), pulls them in slightly and removes the toe out.
Push wheel back in, push fluid back in to track rod ends and spreads the track rods back out.
I'd imagine there's more to it than that though.
Also agree the technical analysis is describing camber, and not very well. Even if it's from a birds eye view, it would have to be from a bird's eye view with the car nose down, a very strange way of describing it :/
rdjohn said:
Can't see that not getting banned on safety grounds to be honest. Especially as a large contingent of mainly tinfoil hat wearing F1 fans believe that Senna died because of steering column failure. bobbo89 said:
This is what I'm thinking as surely the adjustment needs to be made in a way that doesn't interfere with steering input. So in affect you can still steer normally but also adjust the toe in one linear motion, both systems can work together as they operate on two different axis.
Reading on Twitter that apparently Mercedes are referring to the new system as DAS or Dual Axis Steering......Edited by bobbo89 on Thursday 20th February 11:41
SturdyHSV said:
Easiest and most compact way I could envisage it working is simple hydraulic system.
Pull wheel out, drain fluid from track rod ends (effectively), pulls them in slightly and removes the toe out.
Push wheel back in, push fluid back in to track rod ends and spreads the track rods back out.
I'd imagine there's more to it than that though.
However it's achieved, it is a very basic movement to achieve. The genius moment was having the idea in the first place and recognising that the potential value justified pursuing it and getting it on to the car.Pull wheel out, drain fluid from track rod ends (effectively), pulls them in slightly and removes the toe out.
Push wheel back in, push fluid back in to track rod ends and spreads the track rods back out.
I'd imagine there's more to it than that though.
I too would use miniature rams to achieve the movement in a compact way, although to keep the FIA happy maintaining a 100% mechanical link might be preferable. Either way, the core challenge is to push/pull two rods by pushing/pulling the steering wheel. Which patently isn't very much of a mechanical challenge when it comes down to it.
The Hypno-Toad said:
rdjohn said:
Can't see that not getting banned on safety grounds to be honest. Especially as a large contingent of mainly tinfoil hat wearing F1 fans believe that Senna died because of steering column failure. REALIST123 said:
Maybe it is just track but can’t understand why.
Track would be a bit more dodgey in relation to the F1 tech rules though in my mind as it's more suspension than steering? I can understand the toe changing as you and in effect changing that during normal steering anyway.Another wee thought I had, I wonder if the rear suspesion arms design they have is giving them so much DF benefit and stability that they can go big on the toe-out for corners but needed a way to reduce the toe in for the straights?
On second thoughts I doubt this as the car looked good whether he was adjusting it or not, must be reasonably minor?
Dunc.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff