Rule Interpretation - Double deck diffusers

[Matt Somers]

Yea Scarbs as my post started it's a front to back philoshophy (sp) without the front aero correct then air distribution will be wrong for the rear. At the end of the day Honda had a pig aweful aero setup for 08 and thats why they abandoned the season to concentrate on 09. Their interpretations of the rules has led to a better design of car IMO

[jddh1]

For a team to switch to this set up I would imagine a major front end redesign would be required to get enough flow control ahead of the floor

One thing should be taken for granted, however: Some teams will be working feverishly to fix their cars. Let's call it the 7 vs 3 challenge, referring to the 7 teams without the "clever" diffuser over the 3 with the one developed.

[Shaddock]

yep, that idea is worth a CFD, i think it will work, but only if you pull the whole end plate all the way down. I guess this will increase interactrion with the diffuser and wing

I had a go with photochop on the one endplate

[enkidu]

To me I don't think the Brawn's defuser is illegal... Its complied with all regs when they were wrote. They would have to radically change the rule book for that diffuser to not be run legally in Australia.

I wished the other teams would stop spitting their dummies out!!!!

[wesley123]

yep, that idea is worth a CFD, i think it will work, but only if you pull the whole end plate all the way down. I guess this will increase interactrion with the diffuser and wing

I had a go with photochop on the one endplate

like that could work yes, but i guess it works better if you pull the whole end plate down

[Moanlower]

The 7 teams that lost the preseason test by not using the loopholes as much as they could are just sticking together in hope that will undo their defeat. Let's face it, finding LEGAL loopholes in the regs are one of the main challenges in being succesful in F1.

Here's a quote from Rubens from an article I read at autosport.com

"I wasn't bothered by the fact that everyone took for granted that [Bruno] Senna was replacing me, so do you think I'm bothered by the fact that my car is different from the others?" he said.

"We've read the rule book differently, and the result of that can be seen by everyone."

What's freaking incomprehensible to me is that it has to f*ck up the season before it even started while it could easily have been fixed by the FIA prior to that and prior to official protests of some teams.

[myurr]

What's freaking incomprehensible to me is that it has to f*ck up the season before it even started while it could easily have been fixed by the FIA prior to that and prior to official protests of some teams.

I've come to the conclusion that the FIA want the ambiguity, problems, arguments and strife as it serves to keep them important to the running of F1 and helps to exert their political power over the teams. What team will dare step too far out of line for fear of recrimination in a future judgement call made by the FIA.

This really has to stop, either get rid of Max and install someone competent, or scrap F1 and get rid of Bernie and Max and start again. It's one big farce.

[freedom_honda]

Team bosses stop whinging please just because the other teams got a better car than you.

[ESPImperium]

I am thinking along the lines that each team will have something to protest over another team or teams.

7 Teams against Brawn/Williams/Toyota over diffuser is just the start of it.

But im sure that Bernie has expressed to Max to make sure that nothing is clarified before the start of the season as ill put it this way, "controversy creates cash" meaning that Bernie will make a wad due to the popularity of F1. And what does the sport need, more popularity.

Ill put it like this, three teams have exploited a loophole in the rules, and seven teams are a little bit miffed about missing the boat on this one as they "never thought of it like that" and their design departments (ant their wind tunnels and CFD facilities) are a feeling a little bit low as their pride has been hurt.

Heres the rule that relates to the diffuser (i thinks):

3.12.7 No bodywork which is visible from beneath the car and which lies between the rear wheel centre line and a point 350mm rearward of it may be more than 175mm above the reference plane. Any intersection of the surfaces in this area with a lateral or longitudinal vertical plane should form one continuous line which is visible from beneath the car. A single break in the surface is permitted solely to allow the minimum required access for the device referred to in Article 5.15.

Additionally, any bodywork in this area must produce uniform, solid, hard, continuous, rigid (no degree of freedom in relation to the body/chassis unit), impervious surfaces under all circumstances.

the part underlined is the part that Brawn has exploited i feel.

[Conceptual]

WAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH! WAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

Are these grown men? Seriously?

Get the f**k off your ass and make one of your own!

And Scarbs...

Is it more fair to make the 3 with the "best" diffusor design FUBAR their rear aero by removing it, or is it more fair to make the 7 that don't have it play catch up?

Crybabies at the highest level. Period.

I have to wonder how much crying would be going on if these 3 teams were towards the other end of the grid?


And to be honest, if the FIA make them change the diffusors, I hope that those teams come back and f**king PIG STOMP THE LIVING SH*T out of the 7, so they can say "Cry some more, maybe you should wipe the snot from your face, and get your ass back to work!"

I hate this... Seriously, has it always been this way? Team up on the best, because you don't have the talent to actually COMPETE with them?

Get outside your box guys, because if this is deemed legal, I hope you enjoy the show for the rest of the season, because you will have a great view from behind these cars...

[myurr]

the part underlined is the part that Brawn has exploited i feel.

If so then it's pretty easy to argue that they have broken that rule (so I do hope that this is not the loophole they are relying upon). The rule is clear in that the break in the surface is to be the minimum required - without looking it up I'm guessing the device referred to is the starter. The gaping hole that is the upper deck of the Brawn diffuser is clearly not the minimum required for the starter to have access to the gearbox.

[myurr]

Conceptual, it's all well and good to hate the other teams for petitioning against the three with better designs but you must consider that if a team introduces illegal parts on the car, no matter how clever, they shouldn't be allowed to keep them. I'm not saying that the parts in this case are legal or illegal, the problem is that no one seems to know which is the case.

Ideally the FIA would provide a body or service that the teams can go to whenever they think they have found a clever exploit of the rules and ask for a legally binding judgement on whether their interpretation will be considered legal or not. The FIA do not provide such a service, and in this instance even appear to have given different teams different advice.

With effectively written rules and clear and decisive governance from the FIA this situation would not arise, or at the very least would be solved without the circus. The fact that this is not the case is an indictment of the FIA and not of the teams for wanting to know what is actually within the rules and what is not.

[Sawtooth-spike]

the part underlined is the part that Brawn has exploited i feel.

If so then it's pretty easy to argue that they have broken that rule (so I do hope that this is not the loophole they are relying upon). The rule is clear in that the break in the surface is to be the minimum required - without looking it up I'm guessing the device referred to is the starter. The gaping hole that is the upper deck of the Brawn diffuser is clearly not the minimum required for the starter to have access to the gearbox.

If it was Really that clean cut i dont think we would be where we are now.

Lets face is over the last few years we have seen clearly legal devices called illegal and visa vesa. So lets see that madness we have this weekend.

[majicmeow]

My issue with this is why the "7" have left it until the RACE WEEKEND to decide to protest. In my mind, they obviously left it until the last possible moment so that the "7" would not have time to properly design a competitive diffuser. No better way to slow down the guys in front than cripple them with makeshift parts.

There should be a rule on protests or pleas that allows the defending party enough time to properly compensate from the loss (if any). If the protest is not filed AND completed by so-and-so a date, then too bad, the parts get to run.

My 2¢ anyways... I hope the "7" loose miserably is AUS because of this.

[Conceptual]

My issue with this is why the "7" have left it until the RACE WEEKEND to decide to protest. In my mind, they obviously left it until the last possible moment so that the "7" would not have time to properly design a competitive diffuser. No better way to slow down the guys in front than cripple them with makeshift parts.

There should be a rule on protests or pleas that allows the defending party enough time to properly compensate from the loss (if any). If the protest is not filed AND completed by so-and-so a date, then too bad, the parts get to run.

My 2¢ anyways... I hope the "7" loose miserably is AUS because of this.

They left it till now because they know that their talent deficiency is going to be exposed when the BGP cars lap up to 3rd place...

I understand that if it is illegal, then it should not be allowed, but when 3 different teams all show up with very similar exploits, that tells me that there are 3 design teams that think that it is legal enough to develop the entire car around it.

And Helmut Marko saying that "all 7 other teams agree that it is illegal" isn't worth 2 squirts of piss either.

I hope that these diffusors are deemed legal, and we watch someone else win for a change.

I'm getting kind of sick of the Ferrari and McLaren show, especially now that they are assured to not have it again this year, and are trying to do anything to make it that way again.

My hope is that BGP used some of the 15 months of development time to design a paralell "legal" diffusor as well. How much egg on the face is there going to be if it turns out that the BGP, Toyo and the Willies all ran these diffusors simply to throw off everyone elses development concentration at the start of the season?

It doesn't matter really. Aus is in 2 days, and we will see what happens!


PS: Is it really possible that the extra 25mm that is gained in height from this exploit "really" gives BGP a .5sec/lap advantage? I honestly think with a standard diffusor that they will STILL be at least .3s quicker, but who knows?