F1asco!

Well, did anyone watch the 6 car F1 race?
Worse still, were you THERE?

The farce can be summed up quite simply, as complete intranigence to any solutions.

Ferrari, of course, took their usual line of "it works for us", having previously been responsibile, for the current ban on "team orders" by blatantly abusing them in a previous season.

At one point, nine of the ten teams were apparently in agreement - the F1 authorities wouldn't listen.

Sure, Michelin were to blame for bringing inadequate tyres, but the "jobsworth" attitude was responsible for the lack of any resolution.


F1 in the USA? - well, since they'd rather watch cars going round and round an oval, not racing on a banked circuit that F1 cars were never designed for would be no great loss.

Michelin in F1? - I hope it doesn't come down to a one tyre make formula - the varying performance as one make of tyres "comes and goes" relative to another adds spice to what is essentially a dull form of racing.

I'd like to see a breakaway formula, with more flexible decision making, more input from the teams and concentration on good racing, as safe as it can be - and I'd say that means taking away a lot of restrictions (other than crash resistance) and running only on circuits with adequate run-off areas.

Back in the old days of F1, you push too hard, you end up in a gravel trap.

The current plethora of "safety" regulations are down to bad luck, all stemming from Senna's unfortunate accident, which it turns out, actually resulted from excessive "bottoming out" because the tyres had gone cold during a "safety car" period.
 
THERES too many rules and regulations ... too much electronic intervention sure some is needed but i think theres STILL too much!
Back in the old days of F1, you push too hard, you end up in a gravel trap.
could not agree more :)


heres a cut and paste of the rulings they have for FLY BY WIRE or electronic assistance rules and regulations that teams and drivers have to comply with ...

In the modern world of Grand Prix racing, electronics is one of the major players. With fly-by-wire, semi-automatic transmission, and hundreds of other gizmos gracing the cars of today, it is no wonder the FIA have a fist full of rules to throw at the teams to prevent them from creating the ideal - the driverless car!

As we saw in the previous article of this series, the engine management electronics have many preventative rules aimed at ensuring driver input remains a priority requirement. In addition to that, the FIA also has rules covering the transmission and the operation of on-board car controls. As with the engine rulings, the first regulations define the transmission type; no more than two wheel drive, and no automatic gearboxes.

Immediately after this in the rulebook - and in the order of importance no doubt - comes one of the biggest regulations of all: Rule 9.2.1 is the one which bans traction control. It states 'no car may be equipped with a system or device capable of preventing the driven wheels from spinning under power....' Continuing on, the rules also state that not even a system which warns the driver that the wheels are beginning to spin is acceptable. No questions...no traction control.

Clutch control is also solely the job of the driver (with the exception of gear changes, stall prevention, and a clever system which electronically compensates for clutch wear). As in almost every area which rules on electronics, there is a rule referring to traction control, which this time states that the clutch must re-engage after a gear change in a way that does not contravene the 9.2.1 ruling. Because the clutch is operated through the car's electronic system, the relationship between the clutch engagement and the operation of the clutch paddle on the steering wheel must be fixed - so no electronics can help the driver drive!

To ensure the car can be moved away from the track when its systems have failed, the car has to have a system which will leave the clutch disengaged for at least fifteen minutes after the engine has stopped. This system can be operated by a driver or marshall by pressing a button situated within 15cm of the ****pit opening, marked with a sign showing the letter N in a white circle with a red ring - it's easy to spot them on the cars.

The gearbox can contain no less than four and no more than seven different gears, and must have a reverse gear available at all times. To change between these gears, teams use a semi-automatic gearbox, which requires a driver input before it then essentially operates as a fully automatic gearbox would. That means that instead of moving a gear stick which is directly linked to the gearbox, a paddle on the steering wheel will be pulled, and this will send a 'gear change request' to the electronics system.

This means there are some programmes in the system to cover the things a driver would normally be able to do with a manual gear change system. For instance, the rules allow a driver to go from a high to a low gear (sixth to third, for instance) with a press of a button, as long as the electronics ensure that none of the gears in between the two are used to drive the car during the change sequence - just as would happen if he had a manual shift.

The electronics can also be used to prevent an accidental gear choice. They determine whether the revs in the destination gear would be too high for the engine to cope with and, if that is the case, will not allow the change to be made and will cancel the request. The driver will have to press the gear change paddle again to ask the gearbox to try the change again.

The control of the differential in the car is another area which has been explored for loopholes. To operate a differential electronically, the programme must know how the rear wheels are rotating relative to one another - so a measurement of this must be used. The rules state that only instantaneous measurements can be used for control (preventing prediction techniques), and that these measurements can be of the input torque, the difference between the wheel speeds themselves, or the difference between the output shaft torques. As for driver control of the differential, he may only alter the set-up when the car is stationary.

There are many driver operated controls on the car which also come under FIA scrutiny. In the main, these can only be used to operate one action at once, and this action must be done immediately on request. This ensures that (in an extreme view), a driver cannot press the brake pedal then have all the jobs he is required to go through during braking done for him. If things go wrong with a sensor, which could then lead to a problem developing on a car, a back-up sensor may be used with the same or a different setting - as long as the new setting doesn't improve on the performance of the previous sensor.

This allows some amount of redundancy on the sensors, and allows the teams to cope with a problem if they are skilled enough to do so. If things go very wrong, all data is recorded in the car's on-board 'black box' (like an aeroplane flight recorder), which must be conveniently situated in a precise location on a car so that it is easily accessible to download information.

The electronics on an F1 car come under constant scrutiny, and just like the dimensions and weight of the car are checked, all the electronics are regularly monitored for compliance with the rules. This begins at the start of the season, when the car's entire electronics system must be checked and approved by the FIA.

Every microprocessor (the computer 'brain' which is the heart of each system) that is on the car is classified in one of three ways: sealed and not re-programmable, re-programmable via a direct mechanism, or not re-programmable during an event. Those that are re-programmable must be able to be checked out thoroughly by the FIA, who also reserve the right to download any set-up data from the device - and any software that is found to be capable of breaking the rules (even if it is switched off) will see the team in the dock.

To ensure no tampering is done, the FIA will seal any device that can be programmed, and this rule caught out McLaren this year when one of the electronic boxes on Mika Hakkinen's car was missing a seal. Although the team had not modified the electronics, they were docked ten points and forced to pay a substantial fine. The paddock police are always on the prowl...and they're out to prove that crime doesn't pay in Formula One!
and these are the rules for engines ..

The propulsion side of a Grand Prix car involves more than just the engine manufacturers. There are very strict rulings for the fuel suppliers to obey, whilst the teams themselves must consider the design of the fuel tank, fuel feed, and refueling operations.

The type of engine is very much set in stone, and Article 5.1 consists of five rules which basically define what the powerplant will be. Combining them comes up with the standard specifications for the Formula One engine: A non-supercharged four stroke engine of capacity no greater than 3 litres, with ten cylinders and no more than five valves per cylinder. No other engine is acceptable, and innovations aimed at recovering energy from other sources are severely limited (no more than 300kJ of recoverable energy may be stored on the car). But despite these tight defining rules which leave little for the engine manufacturers to play with, they still seem to manage to get more and more power out of the unit!

Other design regulations on the engine side come in the form of materials and gas control. To prevent the use of elaborate materials, which can reduce the weight of the engine but are almost prohibitally expensive for some of the poorer engine manufacturers, the rules state that crankshafts and camshafts must be manufactured out of steel or cast iron, and that the cylinder blocks, the cylinders themselves, and the pistons can in no way incorporate carbon fibre.

Although this does keep costs down, some engine manufacturers complain that it also reduces research and development (and the transfer of innovations into road vehicles). The rules also strictly control the inlet and exhaust gases which are all-important in the power production of an engine: the intake air or the fuel-air mixture in the engine may not be tampered with in terms of its temperature in any way, and variable geometry exhausts are not allowed.

Operation of the engine, particularly in terms of electronic controls, has been in the news in recent times, and the systems (which are usually designed by the engine manufacturers) now require careful control. There must be a fixed relationship between the pedal position at the driver's foot and the throttle controls in the engine, and the throttles cannot be influenced by anything other than the driver putting on or lifting off the accelerator.

That means that although the relationship can be non-linear (i.e. putting the pedal half down will not produce half of the power), the driver can no longer change the engine map whilst out on the circuit, and there can (in theory) be no computer system which would alter the throttle position without the driver's request - such as traction control. The way teams saw ways around this rule was by the use of the words 'except in the case of...', and there are four areas in which the relationship between throttle and pedal may alter - idle control, stall prevention, gear changing, and car speed limiting (for use in the pit lane).

The rules continue, and suggest that when the car is on the track, the ignition and fuel settings (which define the power of the engine) must maintain the same relationship with engine speed and in turn, with throttle position. There are also exceptions in this area, such as compensation for throttle acceleration, changes in pressure and temperature within the engine, and driver-altered fuel mixture (when a driver may select a leaner mix to use less fuel and eke out some extra laps before a pit stop).

On top of the two preceding regulations, the FIA also state that no engine parameter can be altered so that the driver has less control over the engine - but despite all these rules, some teams may have cunningly used the exceptions for other means!

Although their handy driver aids have now been banned, drivers still have it easier these days - teams have developed anti-stall systems, which can stop the driver 'losing' the engine when he loses control of his car. The clutch will fully disengage (a job which the driver used to have to do manually), then within ten seconds, the driver must operate the clutch to de-activate the system before the engine automatically cuts out as a safety measure.

The importance of not stalling, of course, is that there is no on-board starter (cars are started using a pit-operated machine) and with the engine not running, the car will have to be pushed out of the way and consequently out of the race. Another driver aid is the speed limiter, which the driver turns on at the pit entrance to ensure the car does not exceed the pit lane speed limit. They can only be used in first second or third gear, and only in the pit lane - but this didn't prevent some teams allegedly using them to assist traction out on the circuit!

The engine can't run without fuel, so the FIA has rules which aim to ensure that the fuel used - defined as 'petrol' - is 'predominantly composed of compounds normally found in commercial fuels'...and that teams don't use the super-fuels that have cropped up in the past. However, as the FIA is aware that Formula One is a development ground in areas such as this (and perhaps because they want to encourage furl manufacturers to take part in the sport), the rules will allow the use of fuels that have been formulated to minimise emissions and increase efficiency, as well as fuels formulated in advanced processes which may be of commercial use in the future - it's good to see some technology advancement is alive and well in Formula One!

Before the fuel is used at an event, a sample must be submitted to the FIA for approval, and the fuel is then checked against this sample during the event. On the car, it is stored (at no more than 10 degrees below ambient temperature) in a rubber bladder made by an FIA approved manufacturer. This bladder, which can be filled with foam, is surrounded by a crushable structure and situated close to the centre of the car, between the front face of the engine and the driver's back. All fuel lines between this bag and the engine must have a valve fitted which shuts off the pipe upon 50% of the force required to break it. Refueling is done using identical FIA approved rigs which must lock securely onto the car in pit lane, and the fuel filler and breather valve, which has a cover and a locking mechanism to stop it from popping open in a crash, must be within 25cm of the ****pit - all done in the name of safety.

The fuel is perhaps the most dangerous part of the Grand Prix car, especially considering the temperatures the engine reaches. It was also proven in the days of the power-boosting fuels, that engines and fuel can be the key to victory. The aim, then, is to keep costs down and safety at a maximum - and the FIA rules seem to do the job.
and thats just 2 sections from the F1 RULEBOOK

bleh they take all the fun outta the sport :(
 
Even more rules to come for new seasons - and while it would be nice to see more input from the driver and less from the car, the idea of a one tyre make, tightly controlled formula does not appeal.

The FIA are 99% to blame for the current situation, sine they have been so slow to respond to developments in the past, that by the time they decided to ban them, the "minnows" had just spent money buying or developing them.

"Active suspension" is one example - while it was originally developed (in F1) to provide a stable, low running height, for skirts which were subsequently banned (good move, since the unexpected sticking of the skirt could cause a sudden loss of downforce), it was a technology which should have been developed further - and by the time they banned it, pretty well everyone had it.


What really beats me, is why they brought BACK refuelling, after it had been removed on safety grounds.


PS. And apologies for saying "USA", when I really meant, geographically, North America.


Interesting how some sports travel, and some don't - or maybe have only a fanatical minority supporting them.
In a lot of cases, I suppose it is because there is a "local" alternative that is more popular.
 
Top