F1 2010: Ride height adjustments during pit stops

[forty-two]

[It's interesting that the Red Bull system appears to pull the car down to a dynamic ride height unlike most production Nivomat systems that push the car up to a dynamic ride height. This Red Bull reverse direction may have something to do with getting to dynamic ride height most efficiently on the warm up lap. Or maybe it's just a practical matter where you can't push the damn car around the pits if it has lowered onto the plank...

The rules state a minimum ride height at all times, enforced by the plank. So if you had a conventional set up that lifts the car, then it would fail scrutineering when stationary for a while or if the system failed. Also a component failure would drop the car to the floor in the race. By reversing convention, the car is always going to comply with the ride height rule, and any failure would allow the car to keep on racing (alebit rather high).

I wondered about this myself. Perhaps the "Spark-plug" failure in Bahrain was actually something failing on the rideheight system and the team decided to deliberately "trigger" the engine problem in order to have an excuse to park the car ASAP? This might explain the apparently "broken" bit of bodywork around the point where the rear suspension arm joins the body (see image from BBC Red Button forum for details).

[Callum]

[It's interesting that the Red Bull system appears to pull the car down to a dynamic ride height unlike most production Nivomat systems that push the car up to a dynamic ride height. This Red Bull reverse direction may have something to do with getting to dynamic ride height most efficiently on the warm up lap. Or maybe it's just a practical matter where you can't push the damn car around the pits if it has lowered onto the plank...

The rules state a minimum ride height at all times, enforced by the plank. So if you had a conventional set up that lifts the car, then it would fail scrutineering when stationary for a while or if the system failed. Also a component failure would drop the car to the floor in the race. By reversing convention, the car is always going to comply with the ride height rule, and any failure would allow the car to keep on racing (alebit rather high).

I wondered about this myself. Perhaps the "Spark-plug" failure in Bahrain was actually something failing on the rideheight system and the team decided to deliberately "trigger" the engine problem in order to have an excuse to park the car ASAP? This might explain the apparently "broken" bit of bodywork around the point where the rear suspension arm joins the body (see image from BBC Red Button forum for details).

@forty-two, I don't see how the team could make the -missing a cylinder- noise and surely if, somehow, they could do it they would not want to stress the engine by turning off a cylinder.

[forty-two]

@Callum

No, I don't know how a "team" might be able to do this. Perhaps by asking Seb to lean out the engine mixture to such an extent that the engine would misbehave? I don't have the knowledge, but it doesn't stike me as beyond the realms of possibility.

Why might they do this? Well, how about this for a theory (by the way, I'm not trying to suggest that this is anything more than a theory!):

Let's suppose for a moment that RB do indeed have a clever rideheight device that gives them a significant advantage. Disaster strikes and this device malfunctions at the 1st race of the season on ONE of the two cars, but has proved itself to be very useful. The malfunction in question means that the car will be scraping on the deck and wearing out the plank in the process. This will result in a scrutineering failure and will mean that the spotlight of interest is firmly placed onto RB's "mystery" system.

From the team's point of view, they see the device as a significant advantage. I don't therefore think it would be beyond any team with a real desire to win the constructors championship to decide to forefeit an engine in an attempt to keep their clever system a secret and away from the gaze of the other teams/public/scrutineers.

Seriously, this is just a thought that occurred to me a couple of days after the Bahrain GP and I have absolutely no evidence to back it up. I just wanted to throw the idea out there to see what everyone thought.

[autogyro]

You might be completely wrong of course forty two but it is a well thought out suggestion that is very feasible.

[forty-two]

You might be completely wrong of course forty two but it is a well thought out suggestion that is very feasible.

Thanks auto, coming from yourself that is praise indeed!

[Phillyred]

Are there any videos or pics of the infamous Australian GP qualifying session where the RB6 is bottoming out?

[forty-two]

Are there any videos or pics of the infamous Australian GP qualifying session where the RB6 is bottoming out?

I expect that there is, but I think FOM get videos posted online taken down pretty quickly. Rather than actually seeing the car being low in quali, you can hear the car bottoming out, or at least that's what Martin Brundle thought he could hear during quali for the Malaysian GP. He said as much on the BBC coverage.

Granted Martin Brundle is merely a commentator and is not a definitive source, but I do generally find his comments and thoughts to turn out to be right.

Perhaps others have images they could share? I think that some were posted on the RB6 thread before the creation of this thread.

[Phillyred]

Yeah, I went back to try to find some videos on youtube of Vettel's pole lap and all I could find was an onboard view which to my ears didn't reveal anything out of the ordinary- then again I have no idea what I'd be listening for!

[Richard]

I've not seen convincing evidence that the ride height is adjusted.

All we have seen is that the car appears to be high in parc ferme. That's what you'd expect when it has no fuel in it. Its also what you'd expect if any gas system (inc Nivomat) has discharged/leaked.

forty-two - If there is a ride height adjustment it would appear it lowers the car from a high at-rest datum, hence the parc ferme pics. So if Vettel had a failure then it would have simply given him a high ride height. That doesn't really match your theory?

[forty-two]

@richard-leeds - Agreed, but I was suggesting that perhaps the system BROKE during the race in Bahrain, not that the system worked as designed and that as a precaution, the team MIGHT have decided to have Vettel ditch the car on the circuit to avoid too much attention.

Twas only an idea!

[Phillyred]

Interesting conspiracy theory.. However, there would be electronic evidence to suggest RB sent a signal to the ECU causing the spark plug/ignition issue..

[forty-two]

Interesting conspiracy theory.. However, there would be electronic evidence to suggest RB sent a signal to the ECU causing the spark plug/ignition issue..

No need for them to do this. If they suspected that a problem MIGHT occur, a pre-arranged code word could be used over the radio to tell SEB to manually adjust the mixture. No need for a downlink other than the audio feed. And in fact, now we're hearing a little more of the teams transmissions, an instruction to change to "Mix-6" or whatever wouldn't be particularly unusual.

Does anyone remember Hamilton's KERS packing up on him during the 2009 season (I forget which race) and his race engineer told him to perform all sorts of actions to reboot the system. That required no signal to be sent other than audio instruction.

[parmalat]

forty-two, how in the world would Vettel stopping the car on the circuit in Bahrain after the race was finished where he placed fourth have any effect on the level of scrutineering that the car would receive? All the points earning cars go through the same scrutineering process after the race. Stopping on the circuit doesn't hide anything.

[autogyro]

forty-two, how in the world would Vettel stopping the car on the circuit in Bahrain after the race was finished where he placed fourth have any effect on the level of scrutineering that the car would receive? All the points earning cars go through the same scrutineering process after the race. Stopping on the circuit doesn't hide anything.

It is very unlikely but the fact that the scrutineers would see the car does not mean RB wanted the media to further explore the problem when it happened.

[DaveKillens]

One of the worst things that could happen to any team is having a car stop on the track. That means it will have to be loaded onto a flatbed, and of course, opens up the entire car, especially the undertray to anyone standing close by, and with a camera. There is also the realistic chance that the process of loading and transporting the car could invite damages. And if you don't get some competent security to the car as soon as possible, souvenir hunters will strip away a lot of stuff.

I wonder how much Vettel's steering wheel could get on ebay?