Lotus's braking attitude compensator is now illegal

[majicmeow]

Ok, so adjustments must not be made when the car is in motion, but what about when the car is stopped in the pits? Could the system be designed to change the suspension settings on a pit stop without the pit crew physically altering it? What if it changes to a different setting when the front wheels get lifted off the ground for a tire change based on the weight of the car at the time of jthe pit stop?

Just a thought....

[Ray]

This is so stupid. I thought the FIA were trying to save the teams money and then they go and ban a system they've already deemed legal and now Lotus is out all that development time and money. Why don't they just give the teams the cars and let them paint them their own colors? It seems they absolutely refuse to let the teams innovate at all, all they do is allow things and then ban them after time and money have been sunk into their development.

[Crucial_Xtreme]

I think it should be illegal as it violates the Regs clearly. The devices function(primarily) on the suspension isn't for mechanical force or grip, it's for aerodynamic purposes.
After receiving system designs from different teams the FIA realized that teams are going to be spending huge amounts of money on getting the system to work when in effect the RRHS is all but re-making the active ride height control system. Better to deem it legal now then during the season.
I do believe however that the system should have been researched & analyzed more when Lotus initially approached the FIA so that we wouldn't have even gotten this far into this mini-debacle.

[allstaruk08]

" The devices function(primarily) on the suspension isn't for mechanical force or grip, it's for aerodynamic purposes."

surely if its for aerodynamic purpose then its for grip no?

[Ian P.]

Aero advantage ..... not likely.
The objective is normally to minimize the ride height under all conditions, acceleration, cornering and braking. Keeping the nose (and Plank) from rubbing on the track is another issue. Some combination of bump stops, spring rate and spring pre-load is what there is to work with. Using brake reaction to adjust spring pre-load (hence, ride height) doesn't directly provide an aero advantage. Spring rate and preload can be reduced, hence better cornering and a softer ride over the curbs.
The Lotus system just provides more opportunity to play with the compromises.
No more an aero device that was the TMD. Now who was it perfected that first ....???

[donskar]

This is so stupid. I thought the FIA were trying to save the teams money and then they go and ban a system they've already deemed legal and now Lotus is out all that development time and money. Why don't they just give the teams the cars and let them paint them their own colors? It seems they absolutely refuse to let the teams innovate at all, all they do is allow things and then ban them after time and money have been sunk into their development.

Ray, I think you are more prescient than ironic. F1 is a show, meant to enrich Bernie's masters by providing a spectacle useful as a marketing tool. Innovation is not a prerequisite to a spectacle. All that is necessary is a fairly large group of fast, loud, colorful cars, driven by well-tuned media stars. A touch of danger (but not too much) makes the marketing tool even more effective. I seriously believe the day will come (IF Bernie lives long enough) when F1 is as much a "spec" series as US IndyCars.

[Holm86]

"Article 3.15 of the 2012 technical regulations, published this month, states that "any car system, device or procedure which uses driver movement as a means of altering the aerodynamic characteristics of the car is prohibited."

Then the brakes should be illegal?? They make the cars nose dive changing aerodynamics.

Holding the nose at stabil level under braking dosnt change any aero???

No – reread what the FIA said – had the <em>primary if not sole</em> purpose of altering the cars aerodynamics. Breaks certainly have a different primary purpose than altering the aero of the car.

So what if they said the brake compensator is only for stability during braking?? Then it would be legal? Otherwise strutbars shouldnt be legal? Its natural for a car to roll during cornering. Strutbars decreases the roll which mechanichaly increases grip but must also be an aero advantage to have less roll.

[Pierce89]

Aero advantage ..... not likely.
The objective is normally to minimize the ride height under all conditions, acceleration, cornering and braking. Keeping the nose (and Plank) from rubbing on the track is another issue. Some combination of bump stops, spring rate and spring pre-load is what there is to work with. Using brake reaction to adjust spring pre-load (hence, ride height) doesn't directly provide an aero advantage. Spring rate and preload can be reduced, hence better cornering and a softer ride over the curbs.
The Lotus system just provides more opportunity to play with the compromises.
No more an aero device that was the TMD. Now who was it perfected that first ....???

Sorry but it does give an aero advantage. If it holds the front up in braking, then your stationary front ride height can be lower, presto!! greatly improved aero performance.

[tok-tokkie]

Aero advantage ..... not likely.
The objective is normally to minimize the ride height under all conditions, acceleration, cornering and braking. Keeping the nose (and Plank) from rubbing on the track is another issue. Some combination of bump stops, spring rate and spring pre-load is what there is to work with. Using brake reaction to adjust spring pre-load (hence, ride height) doesn't directly provide an aero advantage. Spring rate and preload can be reduced, hence better cornering and a softer ride over the curbs.
The Lotus system just provides more opportunity to play with the compromises.
No more an aero device that was the TMD. Now who was it perfected that first ....???

I quite agree.

If you run soft compliant springs the car hits the deck under braking. To counter that the usual thing is to fit stiffer springs. McLaren cars used to skip around the track on very rigid springs. With this system they can retain the soft spring but, when the brakes come on, the reaction lengthens the pushrod so maintains ride hight without losing the compliant spring which gives good roadholding.

On the motorcycle systems back in the 80s the brake reaction closed a valve in the damping system which prevented nose dive but it locked up the suspension which is completely different to what the Lotus system does.

I see it as a suspension thing with a second order aerodynamic benifit. Suspension develoment should be encouraged, not prevented.

I agree that it can be interpreted as contravening the rule about adjustable suspension. I think the rule is absurd because it closes an avenue for technical development. If it was driver or digitally controlled (as against simple direct electrical linkage without signal processing)suspension adjustment that were banned that would be ok.

[mx_tifoso]

Quick question: did McLaren develop this as well?? I don't recall hearing anything about their version but I could be wrong. Thanks in advance.

I really wanted to see this in action this year!

[xpensive]

Quick question: did McLaren develop this as well?? I don't recall hearing anything about their version but I could be wrong. Thanks in advance.

I really wanted to see this in action this year!

When this is a rather simple hydraulic application, as long as you don't dig into temperature's influence on stiffness and what not, and being a well known practice on motorcycles since a long time, I'd be surprised if it has not been evaluated and possibly tested by most top-teams in Formula One?

[mx_tifoso]

So since it's a "rather simple hydraulic application", is the cry about the wasted spending not so much of a issue anymore? Seeing how they couldn't have spent significant amounts given that this is nothing out of the extraordinary and thus doesn't take away from the rest of the development.

[xpensive]

That's the way I see things anyway, myself and a nowadays inactive member have actually reverse-engineered the system in a pretty detailed fashion over the past couple of days, why I can't see megabucks wasted, but time perhaps?

[beelsebob]

Aero advantage ..... not likely.
The objective is normally to minimize the ride height under all conditions

Sure... but why is it...

Answer: because it allows you to more effectively exploit wing in ground effect.

[timbo]

I wonder if movable caliper is still allowed. I guess this still can be used to change the damper pressure or whatnot?