Topic: The floor boards move?

[Ultra]

According to Autosport:

Analysis: movable floor the new buzzword

Learn all about the latest in F1 controversy here:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/57511

[MG]

Whenever there is a rule, someone will attempt to find the absolute outer limit of said rule. This is the grand principle upon which the entire legal profession is based. It is human nature to go right up to the edge of official tolerance - and occasionally cross over into terra incognita just to see what happens.

At first blush, there is nothing in this story that makes me cringe. What DOES disturb me is the extent to which the rules in F1 currently discourage true innovation in favor of this chicken shit kind of stuff that means nothing to anybody except the people directly involved.


WOW!  V-8's running on gasoline!        What's next, huh?   

[mpatrizio]

This makes me smile, because it means that Ferrari are officially back on top.  When Ron Dennis resorts to these tactics, it's because he's been beaten, and he's scared.  Keep in Mind that BMW also uses this system, and has been since last year...

Little tidbit from the article:

But with the increased amount of ballast located in the floor, the FIA has allowed the teams a degree of freedom in mounting the exposed floor, so that it won't be damaged over kerbs. Despite this degree of flexibility allowed, floors are still subject to the deflection test.

The recent allegations, following the Australian Grand Prix, suggest the Ferrari floor could lift at high speed leading the diffuser to stall. This could either increase straight-line speed through a loss in drag, or improve the car's balance by reducing rear downforce.

To do this, the spring could allow the floor to pass the FIA test and still move when at higher speed.

Other teams mount their floor with a thin metal strut or cable, however these solutions are just as prone to flex at speed, as the support could bend under the pressure of passing under the car.

The various teams' methods of mounting the floor have been known to the FIA scrutineers for some time. The Ferrari floor, for one, has passed scrutineering in every race it was used so far, at least since the Japanese Grand Prix last year.

However, as with the flexi-wings controversy last year, the team could still be required to make changes to their device, and the FIA may indeed issue a clarification outlining what is acceptable for mounting the floor - or even make changes to the deflection test.

The funny thing is that Autosport did a special report on the floor boards after Brazil!!!  So you're telling me that only now Ron has a problem with it??? 

http://www.autosport.com/subs/login.php?r=http://www.autosport.com/journal/article.php/id/805&type=journal&id=805

This is hillarious.  He just needs to find a way to make his car faster, if not he's just preparing his excuses for when BMW beats his cars at the next race.

[MG]

As I saId elsewhere, McLaren needs to make their cars faster in qualiying and faster off the line (niether had a great start in Australia) at the start. All the rest of this is sour grapes, as MP suggests.   

[mpatrizio]

I'm wondering if McLaren's new ownership group is putting pressure on Ron, which is causing this complaining at an unusual time in the season. 

His complaints usually start after the european season starts, because it coincides with his development schedule.  The cars used to get all sorts of new components for Imola in round 4.  It's easier for him to gauge his status once his major upgrades are on the car.

It's either this, or the McLaren does not have the development potential that prior evolutions had, and if that's the case McLaren is screwed. 

[Ultra]

When Ron Dennis resorts to these tactics,

The Ron Dennis "tactics" you refer to are all originating from this quote:

“We will see how things are in two or three races,” he told Speedtv.com. “There is a whole range of things that come to light in the first race and you go and you say what is legal, and what is not legal. Most teams are given that current race to enjoy the benefit of the doubt. I think there will be a rationalization of some aspects of some cars that would close the gap if no one did anything.

“You look at people’s cars, you are not always of the opinion that rule interpretation has been strictly adhered to, and you get in to, ‘Hold on a second, what are we allowed to do and what are we not allowed to do?’ and that always takes place at the first event. So it takes a race or two to know what is or isn’t permitted.”

He doesn't mention any teams.  He doesn't mention moving floors.  We don't even know what question he was answering with these words. Seems to me he is attempting to find out what he can and can't get away with by finding out what others are getting away with.  Keeping in mind that the mass damper system was determined legal at each inspection at every race for near a full calendar year, then later determined illegal by the FIA, how do any of us know if these "moving floors" are legal without inquiring about them with the gods at the FIA?   How do you know if they are legal, Mpat?   Is it "tactics" to find what can be done to your own cars to make them faster? How do you know what items and teams Ron are refering anyway?   Because the press told you so?  Based on the words in his quote, you can't know what teams or what rules or anything he was refering to without inference and assumptions.

For another chat board.....

It's Ferrari. They don't 'cheat', everybody knows that. There is nothing to see here, and all of the Ferrari fans know the regs inside out and have access to the intricate details of the design of the Ferrari floor and so know, beyond doubt, that it is legal and they are doing nothing wrong. You must just accept this...

I thought of you, Mpat, upon reading this quote. 

[mpatrizio]

He's pissed that the BMW's were competetive with his cars, and that he'd have to explain himself to his corporate bosses, who in the past he didn't need to justify anything to because he was the boss.  That's all there is to this, IMHO. 

Nothing worse in Stuttgart than when the boys from Bavaria take it to you.

And regarding Ferrari, I never said that the floor boards are legal.  I posted an article that stated that they are.   

In fact, I really don't care if they are or they're not.  That's for the FIA to sort out, I'll respect whatever decision they make.  Although I much prefer the discussion to take place now, rather than at the season's end, when it was ruled that the Renualt mass dampers were illegal.  That was messy.

And technically speaking, until the FIA calrifies the rule....  The floorboards are legal, just as the mass dampers were legal in the first 2/3rds of 2006. I'm not speaking of with rose colored glasses here.  I'm speaking fact.   

[Ultra]

He's pissed that the BMW's were competetive with his cars, and that he'd have to explain himself to his corporate bosses, who in the past he didn't need to justify anything to because he was the boss.  That's all there is to this, IMHO. 

Nothing worse in Stuttgart than when the boys from Bavaria take it to you.

And regarding Ferrari, I never said that the floor boards are legal.  I posted an article that stated that they are.   

In fact, I really don't care if they are or they're not.  That's for the FIA to sort out, I'll respect whatever decision they make.  Although I much prefer the discussion to take place now, rather than at the season's end, when it was ruled that the Renualt mass dampers were illegal.  That was messy.

And technically speaking, until the FIA calrifies the rule....  The floorboards are legal, just as the mass dampers were legal in the first 2/3rds of 2006. I'm not speaking of with rose colored glasses here.  I'm speaking fact.   

I agree with this completely. 

[Ultra]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/57650

 The FIA has modified its bodywork tests to ensure a floor mounting system used primarily by Ferrari does not circumvent the regulations, autosport.com can reveal, after McLaren asked the governing body for a clarification over the matter.

The issue of movable floors reached a head at the Australian Grand Prix when McLaren boss Ron Dennis suggested that some rivals had interpreted the rules in a way that his team did not agree with.

Although he did not specifically name Ferrari or mention the area of movable floors - sources subsequently revealed that his team were primarily concerned about a spring device fitted to the front section of the F2007 floor.

Article 3.17.4 of Formula One's technical regulations states that no bodywork, such as the floor, can deflect more than 5mm vertically when exposed to a 500 Newton load upward.

The spring device was allegedly calibrated to have enough resistance to allow the floor to pass this FIA flexibility test when the car was in the garage, but then give way when the car was exposed to higher forces out on the circuit.

This would potentially allow the front of the floor to rise up when the car is at speed, which would improve its aerodynamics and specifically increase straight-line speed.

McLaren became aware of Ferrari's device, believed to be used by BMW Sauber as well, early in the Melbourne weekend. Subsequently, autosport.com has learned that McLaren's engineering director Paddy Lowe wrote to the FIA in Australia, asking if his team could fit a similar system to their car.

In his letter, which also contained a diagram of McLaren's plans, Lowe wrote: "We would like to consider the installation of a mechanism on the front of our floor, consisting of springs and pivots.

FIA correspondence"By a suitable arrangement and configuration of the springs (rates and preloads) within this mechanism, we will be able to control the flexibility of the bib so as to meet the requirements of the test specified in Article 3.17.4, but to otherwise allow greater flexibility at higher loads by a non-linear characteristic."

Lowe's letter was clearly aimed at clarifying whether or not the use of such a device was deemed legal if its sole intention was to get around the FIA's flexibility tests.

A week later, FIA technical delegate Charlie Whiting responded to McLaren, and in a letter also distributed to every other team, he clarified the allowed usage of such a device - and revealed that bodywork testing would be altered accordingly.

Whiting wrote: "The test described in Article 3.17.4 is intended to test the flexibility of bodywork in that area, not the resistance of a device fitted for the purpose of allowing the bodywork to move further once the maximum test load is exceeded.

"Quite clearly, any such device would be designed to permit flexibility and is therefore strictly prohibited by Article 3.15 of the Technical Regulations.

"We have no objection to a device in this area which is fitted to prevent the bodywork from moving downwards, provided it is clear that it is not designed to circumvent the test described in Article 3.17.4.

"Therefore, with immediate effect, we will be testing bodywork in the relevant area with any such devices removed."

The move could effectively outlaw Ferrari's system, which would be a welcome boost to McLaren after Ferrari dominated the first round of the championship.

"We are going to improve our car one tenth to two tenths every single race weekend, and that is now the race that is on," Whitmarsh said in Australia.

"If Ferrari respond and they can improve at the same rate or quicker than us, then we will find it tough. If they cannot, we will overhaul them. And that is the challenge.

"They are a strong, competent team and that is why we are in F1 - that is why we enjoy that challenge, that chase, and we will be pushing hard this year."

[MG]

From a gimlet eyed lawyer's perspective, this was very smart maneuvering by McLaren. They did not protest, they simply asked if they could fit such a system to their cars.  The RESULT was the same but they appeared to be less confrontational about it that would be the case in the event of an outright protest. A legal advisor would applaud such a strategy.

The rest of you probably figure its all bullshit and it probably is. 

Note to MPatrizio: PUT THAT SHOTGUN DOWN!  RON DENNIS ISN'T EVEN IN THE COUNTRY AND YOUR GUN IS NOT THE INTERCONTINENTAL MODEL!     

[mpatrizio]

Very, very clever work by McLaren....  In their typical underhanded fashion, they find a way to accuse someone of cheating, without accusing them.  So now  Ron Dennis can say that he "never accused anyone of anything".

But I truely suspect this is all false hope.  Remember the flexi-wing issue last  year, they fixed the wings but the Ferrari was still the quickest thru the speed trap.  This floorboard issue won't make a dent in the performance of the car.

I'm telling you guys, in race trim the Ferrari is over a second faster per lap than any other car on the grid.  I'm convninced that they're sand bagging in the race.  Massa started with a comprimised strategy, didn't have the balls to make the passes, and still finished respectably.  Unlike McLaren in Melbourne 1998, Ferrari are smart enough to not arrogantly blitz the field so they avoid any extra FIA attention. 

Those are just my thoughts.  You'll see the proof when it's an all Red front row in Malaysia.

And FWIW, I'm not sure if anyone noticed that Kimi's fastest race lap would have qualified him on the front row of the grid.

[Ultra]

Remember the flexi-wing issue last  year, they fixed the wings

No they didn't.  They were never ruled illegal.

This floorboard issue won't make a dent in the performance of the car.

You hope.

I'm telling you guys, in race trim the Ferrari is over a second faster per lap than any other car on the grid.

Fernando's three best sector times <Ideal lap> put him right up with Kimi's three best sector times.  The Ferrari's always go well at Albert Park.  One race does not a season make.  Your thoughts could be further off the mark than you might be expecting.  Let's see if the Ferrari is reliable and fast over a whole season without the likes of Ross Brawn.  IMHO, Ferrari is in for team turmoil.  Besides, Kimi's engine for Sepang is leaking water.  Not very reliable to me.

 

[mpatrizio]

Remember the flexi-wing issue last  year, they fixed the wings

No they didn't.  They were never ruled illegal.

They forced the teams to add a center  support element to the rear wings to prevent the top element from twising down onto the bottom element and closing the gap between the two.

To prevent rear wing flex, the two wing plates must be bridged by means of rigid impervious support (article 3.10.4)

Can you post a link to the race sector times?  I've been looking for that data online for a while.  I find it hard to believe what you're saying, considering that Kimi's fastest lap was more than a full second clear of Alonso's.

The sector times from practice and qualifying also show a very different story.

[Ultra]

To prevent rear wing flex, the two wing plates must be bridged by means of rigid impervious support (article 3.10.4)

As I remember it, the flexiwing controversy involving Ferrari was about the front wings.

Can you post a link to the race sector times?  I've been looking for that data online for a while.  I find it hard to believe what you're saying, considering that Kimi's fastest lap was more than a full second clear of Alonso's.

The sector times from practice and qualifying also show a very different story.

http://www.forix.com/ will give you sector times.

Out of 20 fastest laps of the race, Kimi did 8, Alonso 8, Hamilton just 4 and Massa 0.  Not the picture of a dominant car.

Practice and qualifying don't score points.

[Otto Puzzell]

  Maybe I'm looking at the data wrong, but it appears that the fastest lap was set by Kimi, and re-set 9 times - by Kimi. I don't see how the 11th through 20th fastest laps have much impact, given that.

[MG]

A  propos of nothing, I wonder what they DO use for coolant in these beasts.  Probably doesn't come in gallon jugs from PepBoys, I imagine......

[mpatrizio]

Massa was on a heavy fuel load and different strategy, you can't truthfully compare his times to Kimis.

[Ultra]

Massa was on a heavy fuel load and different strategy, you can't truthfully compare his times to Kimis.

They are teamates!       He was 2 seconds slower and at some point ran the car low of fuel.   You can't truthfully look at one teammate and determine the pace of the car relative to the rest of the field.

[Ultra]

Other places for sector times:

http://www.f1matrix.it/gp_2007_eng/index.html

http://www.tagheuer.com/f1/season-overview/circuitdetail/index.lbl?circuit=melbourne&year=2007

[mpatrizio]

Analysis: floor clampdown a test for all

By Jonathan Noble Monday, April 2nd 2007, 09:42 GMT

The impact of the FIA clampdown on movable floors in Formula One has been felt by teams beyond those at the centre of the controversy, but is unlikely to make much difference to the fight at the front of the field.

That is the view of leading technical figures, who reckon that the new testing procedure on floors that will be introduced from this weekend's Malaysian Grand Prix has forced every team to make an extra effort to ensure they will not be caught out.

One engineer, who did not wish to be identified, told autosport.com: "There was a substantial performance benefit from flexing the floor - as well as saving chassis damage. I think most teams at the front have been using such a device for many years."

Following a rule clarification request from McLaren, the FIA will from now on be testing the flexibility of floors without any of the supporting devices that were allowed to be fitted in the past.

This comes amid suspicions that some teams may have been using these support devices to cleverly resist the FIA tests but then allow the floor of the car to flex up at high speed - improving a car's aerodynamics and therefore straightline speed.

Although the focus for the floor controversy has revolved around Ferrari and the BMW Sauber teams, and many expected these two outfits to lose the most because of the changes, autosport.com understands that more than half the grid have had to make subsequent modifications to their cars.

Without the use of the supports, all teams now have to ensure that their floor is stiff enough to resist the 500 Newton force that is applied by the FIA.

Increasing the stiffness of the floor will not make a visible difference to the car, so teams can keep quiet on whether they have had to make modifications or not, but sources suggest that only three or four teams have not had to make any modifications. Only Williams and Super Aguri have confirmed that they have not had to make any changes.

Of the teams at the centre of the issue, BMW Sauber have said they are 'looking into the matter', while all Ferrari will say officially is: "as usual we will do whatever will be required according to the FIA regulations and specifications."

Renault head of race engineering Alan Permane told autosport.com, however, that he is not surprised that so many teams have had to work on their floor stiffness - because the area has been openly exploited for many years.

"I think it affects every team," he said about the new tests. "I will be very surprised if anyone has not looked into this. The design of the front has been like this for years, so everyone was doing the same thing.

"I don't think you will see any difference to the cars though. Most of the car's fronts have got all these different aero pieces, and the cars will still have the strut fitted so as to stop the floor flexing downwards."

Permane reckons that there have been potential big gains in the past from well executed flexing of the floor. There were some suggestions that at the height of the use of movable floors in the late 1980s, that a good version could be worth as much as 0.7 seconds on the straight at Silverstone.

"It depends on how clever it was," added Permane. "Our car has conformed to the regulations before and I am confident it will conform to the regulations now, no problem.

"To be honest, it (the changes his team have had to make) did not make a huge difference. We are very happy with how we are running."

Although movable floors have been used for years, Permane is not surprised that their use has finally come under the spotlight.

"There is always something to start the season, isn't there," he said. "Someone always sees something on the car. There is always a flexible wing, or a bendy something."

But although the impact of the new test has been widely felt, Williams technical director Sam Michael believes it will ultimately make little difference to the status quo in F1.

"It is not going to make a big change to be honest," he said. "Our floor is fine, but even those who have had to modify, it is not a big thing. I don't know why it has become such a big issue."

Why now?  The teams have been using the floorboards since the 80s....  Strange.

[Ultra]

Why now?  The teams have been using the floorboards since the 80s....  Strange.

I asked the same thing when the Michelin tires suddenly became an issue before Monza in 2003.

 

[mpatrizio]

I've got a possibility for you....

Maybe McLaren have found another way around the regulation and the only way they could gain an advantage was if the other way was banned.....

Tiregate was similar yet  vastly different...  The tire measurement technique was clarified, Michelin went beserk because it did provide an advantage.  Some people called them cheaters, I personally did not.  I called them clever.

In this case the floor board measurement technique has been clarified, and no one is complaining.

What is strange is that this is an example of McLaren blowing the whistle on themselves for something that has been in use for 20 years!!!  Think about that 20 years!!!

Very, very strange stuff.

[Ultra]

Very, very strange stuff.

Perhaps McLaren have found their car faster when the floor remains motionless?  Besides, with all the changes at Ferrari there is no better time to try to destabilise them than now.

[mpatrizio]

Very, very strange stuff.

Perhaps McLaren have found their car faster when the floor remains motionless?  Besides, with all the changes at Ferrari there is no better time to try to destabilise them than now.

Yes, but I don't believe this is really directed at Ferrari.  Everyone knew that they'd be fast this year, I'm suspecting as I always have that this is more directed at BMW.

But again, I still feel it's not going to have a real impact on any of the cars.

It could be an attemt to shake up Ferrari, but I think we've already seen that the team is rock solid.  The only[/i] thing that can shake them up is if Kimi has 3 bad races in a row or he stops scoring because of reliability.  That would induce a total panic, that I'm not sure they could recover from without Ross.  The Italian press will put so much pressure on this group that they'll crack.

The magic number is 3.  3 in a row, and all hell breaks loose in Maranello.  You'll see Michael test driving the car, Rory Byrne back from his semi-retirement in Bora Bora (or wherever his dive resort is), and finally Luca Di sitting on the pit wall meddling in matters himself.  It would be an implosion the likes of which F1 has never seen before.

As self important as Ron Dennis believes he is, no outside entity could cause this.

[Ultra]

But again, I still feel it's not going to have a real impact on any of the cars.

It could be an attempt to shake up Ferrari, but I think we've already seen that the team is rock solid. 

I don't see this "solidness" from one race.  Kimi needing a new motor for race two won't help that either.  Frankly, I think Michael coming around this winter was destabilising to the drivers.  This time away from Europe is good for them.  I think the Italians are bound to face some sort of gut check before the season is out.  I do not believe the team will be quite as predictable, if such an event occurs, as they once were.