What the FIA Should do about Porpoising
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 май 2024
- BLURRED IMAGES - Apologies for this, we had to remove some images from the video as we were made aware that they are property of FOM.
🔧 Thanks to Scarbs for joining us once again! Go follow him on Twitter for F1 Tech news! 👉 / scarbstech
Baku’s combination of a VERY long straight, and a pretty bumpy surface lead to some HORRIFIC porpoising from the majority of the cars.
And people are rightly concerned about the safety of the drivers. Lewis got out the car looking absolutely broken, and even nearly lost it coming through the fast corners onto the back straight (all because of the porpoising).
But - some of the suggested solutions seem “ill-advised” to me. So let's chat about what the FIA could do - but also what we think they SHOULD do. Let's get into it.
But firstly, it must be said that some teams - like Red Bull and Alpine seemed not to have any porpoising - and were great on the straights as a result of it. So porpoising can be removed within the rules.
But some seem to be dealing with it whilst keeping performance high. For example the Ferrari seems to bounce a fair bit, but at a lower frequency than something like the Mercedes. And it doesn’t seem to cost them performance.
➤Follow Driver61 on:
➤ Instagram- @official_driver61 - bit.ly/D61Insta
➤TikTok - @official_driver61 - bit.ly/D61TikTok
➤ Follow Scott on:
➤ Twitter - / scottkmansell
➤ Instagram - @official_driver61 - bit.ly/D61Insta
➤ Follow Callum on:
➤ TikTok - @callumraces / callumraces
➤ Twitter - @callum_mcintyre / @callum_mcintyre
➤ Instagram - @mcintyre.jpg / mcintyre.jpg
#F1 #Formula1 #Porpoising 
Авто/Мото
![Natanael Cano - Ya Te Olvidé [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/xLig8I91SJQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Simple...install inside the cockpit sensors to mesure the frequency and vertical G forces while in porpoising. The Teams breaching the specified numbers, would need to raise their car height.
Thisssssss!
Couldnt agree more!!
That´s what I immediately tought of. Why are they acting like it´s that difficult?
Yes, the question is at what point should they do that? If a car experiences porpoising in FP3, should there be an imposed ride height limit? In that case I say yes. But changes after qualifying are a no no. What keeps teams from setting the car up so it only porpoises during qualies and races. hat do you do then? meatball them?
Your solution sounds nice in theory and I'm all for it but in practice teams can do things to get around this way too easily.
Yes, that is the fair rule. Can't blame the rules for developing a shitty car and then complain
People aren't making enough of a point of how Hamilton even said in his interview that he and Mercedes CHOSE to go with a lower ride height KNOWING that the car would bounce. He agreed to it. Then decided to make a point out of it post race.
But that's what racers will always do - prioritise speed over safety. That's why regulations exist. If there wasn't a minimum driver weight requirement drivers would starve themselves to get a better lap time.
Ban porpoising over a certain G like suggested - that hurts Mercedes, not helps them
Duh, Mercedes wants all the teams to raise the ride height. The can’t compete now, they are going to drive next to Latiffi if they are the only ones raising it. Mercedes gambled and fell on their face, now they are going about it the sneaky way. Just as with the pitstop times, their wasn’t an incident in 10 years but Mercedes complained that it’s unsafe! No! They just could not compete with Red Bull when it came to pitstop times.
It's not just Mercedes. *Carlos Sainz* and *Gasly* have also complained about it literally every race weekend.
so? That's still a result of shitty, poorly considered rules.
@@Tomwithnonumbers Then they shouldn't make a big drama of it afterword's. And hamilton was dialing up the drama and theatrics to 11. Sure it's unconfortable and probably hurts, but not to the extent hamilton is making it out to be
I like the idea of the sensor. It really isn't fair to punish other teams who have it under control already so a sensor with a max G force seems to be the best option and would force teams like Merc to do what they should have been doing all along, sacrifice performance to ensure driver safety and develop your car from there to move forward.
I don't agree, cuz it wud effect ferrari who r not complaining and r faster. Merc must just deal with it or lift their car if they don't want lady lulu crying like he dropped the soap.
Can't stand toto, Lewis and George. I think they exaggerating the pain cuz we havnt seen ANYONE climb out the car like that cry baby
@@kondjanegongo796 Sainz is also complaining.
If every rule change needs a new sensor then the F1 car will be even heavier. And overcomplicated.
@@kondjanegongo796 sainz, ocon and gasley are all complaining. 🙄🙄
@@GloomGaiGar Would Sainz also complain if he were faster than LEC?
Just asking for a friend...
Also, as I remember Sainz only complained on one or two tracks so far.
I would suggest this is the responsibility of the teams, and the drivers themselves.
If the FIA do anything at all I would suggest an official statement reminding teams that they are responsible for their employees - they may be liable for any injuries deemed avoidable.
Then see how quickly the excuses go away and ride heights get raised to fix these issues for the teams concerned.
agreed, this is all pressure from merc acting entitled as always
@@mikekovacich2925 Agreed!
This falls onto the FIA for forcing ground effects without letting teams test on track during the development process.
@@flavious27 Porpoising is a known problem for ground effect cars since the 60s... F1 is the pinnacle of race engineering, you would expect they know their history and do their homework.
The race is not only between drivers, it's between the engineers as well. It's the teams that need to figure this out.
I like the idea of a official signed statement to make the teams responsible for the health of their drivers. This way they indirectly force the team to find solutions or workarounds.
If they do change the rules to mitigate porpoising, there is not as much engineering freedom (which is already minimal with these rules).
@@flavious27 the forced the ground effect, yes ... But not the level of usage of said ground effect. if one team can solve it, all teams can solve it.
Even if there were a fix, I don't think any team will want a FIA rule change/solution because it is Mercedes who are the most affected by porpoising; the team that dominated all of hybrid engine era and now finally with some problems... yet arguably the third fastest car on the grid. Toto needs to raise the height and protect their drivers, and go look for a solution within his team, period.
I truly don't understand that this is a discussion at all. You are completely right. They can solve it with ease but their ego is to big.
Watch a rally video and them come back and tell me proposing is worse.
Uh Haas have it worse when the car have lower fuel
Teams dont care as it is not them suffering, however the drivers are, and I am not just on about Merc, other drivers are complaining too.
mercedes have some of the best porpoising on the grid, its the car bottoming out
The maFIA already bent the knee when it came to increasing minimum weight so the Mercedes could reinforce the floor, while other times didn't need to.
Maybe Mercedes need to lift their ride height which will make them slower but since they designed a poor car this year perhaps they need to run with Haas and not to try to match Ferrari and disable their drivers….
Precisely
Yup
Mercedes already said the ride height won't change their porpoising issues.
@@brownass2 Mercedes need to limit their speeds then. Just because a team designed a trash car it shouldn’t mean ALL cars should suffer repercussions
@@HGRAP1 they can do whatever they want but creating a blanket rule at this point is ridiculous.
To me it appears clear that RB has designed a better car. In order to lessen the gap from RB the Merc needs to run at a ride height that enables porpoising to occur fairly dramatically. The Merc crew is free to raise the ride height on their own, but performance suffers. They are free to increase damper rebound, which would likely slow the rate of porpoising, but cost lap time. They could run the car stiffer to help eliminate it as well, but again, the car's not designed for a stiffer package. THEY therefore have chosen to beat the crap out of their drivers because they have designed a car that is not as good as the RB or the F. Now even tho I'm speaking as a huge GR fan, it's just flat out wrong to mandate all the other cars run at a min ride height, effectively punishing the RB and the Ferrari for designing a better car and allowing the Merc to be more competitive with their flawed car. It's their own fault. They designed the car and they built the car. They need to figure out a solution that allows them to maintain some level of competitiveness and not destroy their driver's backs. If they can't then they should take their lumps this year and fix their stuff for next year. What's next... making some other rules changes to make the Haas a frontrunner? It's just Toto being a whiney little boy. I believe he's learned that from his drama queen driver Lewis.
Amen to that.
Agreed!
Ferrari has more porpoising. I am concerned for Leclerc and Sainz. I want them to have long careers but they will not if this continues.
@@saintsalieri don't worry, they don't race long enough to take any physical pain from porpoising
@@philipjkb15 almost made the same joke haha. More worried about the g forces from spinning in gravel traps at this point :'(
I’m so tired of every single f1 media continue with this pattern.
Porpoising was a problem 40 years ago, some teams haven’t gotten on top of it like others and I think personally it’s completely ridiculous to change regs just because some of the teams are incapable of figuring it out like other teams.
Where has the spirit of sporting gone?
Tbf they used side skirts to mitigate it - banned.
You can use active suspension to mitigate it - banned.
So what the hell are you meant to do when the two best methods to control porpoising was banned.
That's like me telling you, that you have to fend for yourself in a jungle. Oh also I'm going to chop your arms off so you can't even defend yourself. It's nonsensical
So when DAS was banned what happened to your sporting..lol
@@ABI20087 DAS was more of a grey area in the reg
Porposing is a problem in other racing catagories too, they havent changed the rules because of it teams just had to raise the ride hight.
@@comeatmebro3229 other racing series have a third of the downforce and forces on the body... It's called formula 1 for a reason
All teams, including Mercedes, decided against mandatory minimal ride height right before the season start, but now that they are losing, they're complaining. Changing the rules would be unfair to other teams, Mercedes blocked all suggestions to improve the competition over the last 8 years consistently ! They can simply raise the ride height and have *zero* health or safety issues, why is this even a discussion ???
Just toto being sad that they made a shitbox
@@magnusmunch2116 all teams are porpoising to some extent. Mercedes are the third fastest car. George is the only driver who has finished top 5 every single race. He's literally catching up to Leclerc. So get fucked.
Just like every other team blocked it when they were dominat, so that point is already bs (besides that the fia still tried to stop the merc dominace with banning new things like das, same thing). Yes they could raise it but is this the concept of the cars and how they should work? Even teams wich hadn’t problems with porposing (Aston, haas, alpha tauri and alfa Romeo) complained about it after Baku.
The solution is definitely not in changing the rules that is clear but “simply raising the ride hight” and throwing the complete concept of the cars away isn’t it either. It’s easier said then done.
Why, indeed? ;-)
FIA didn't ban DAS for Merc, FIA made sure the others wouldn't develop a system, making it a even playing field halfway through the season.
They said they wouldn't allow it in a next season. So Merc benefitted a year an no other team spent money developing a similar system.
If a team cant design a car that doesn't porpoise, then it no one else's fault but their own! And if that same team wants to harm or hurt their drivers then thats the teams and drivers problem! All the cars are doing it to some degree so its not just mercedes thats doing it!
If all the cars are doing it doesn’t that imply it’s a health risk for all drivers?
@@thecptproject8184 shhh don't try and use logic. They're just happy Merc is struggling.
That's why FIA needs to step in to ensure driver safety because so many teams are ready to milk tragedies, happening by their own doing.
@@thecptproject8184 driving a f1 car at all is health risk
@@thecptproject8184 no because the other teams have it manageable. Mercedes have a serious problem with it but don't want to do anything to fix it at risk of worse performance so they compromise their drivers health instead.
Very good analysis and solution. The most important moment to determine the maximum vertical G-forces should be done on the fastest lap during qualifying. Have teams adjust ride height in pre-race parc ferme. If they choose not to adjust it enough for the race and the max vertical G-forces is exceeded again during the race, then pull the meatball!
Good solution!
It's kind of scary to see what Mercedes will do to it's drivers just to be the third best team.
And to then have the gall to play the victim and ask for a rule change that is unfair to basically all the teams but Mercedes, as no-one else has that big of a problem with the porpoising.
Ummm gasly said the same!
ALL teams will always prioritize performance over comfort. They're making race cars not beds.
@@GloomGaiGar ALL teams have the responsibility to keep their drivers safe. Discomfort is a far cry from the crippling pain Lewis was apparently experiencing in Baku.
No they don't have to make their drivers comfortable but driver safety is a completely different matter, one which all teams seem to take very seriously except for Mercedes.
Poor Lewis must bouncing for 60 000 000$ per year. What a sacrifice!
Yeah let’s forget Christian Horner bitching about all of Mercedes great innovations and banning them now. Mercedes cant do the same you’re saying?
No need to bend the rules just because SOMEONE is unwilling to admit their incompetence, know damn well they are putting their drivers in those conditions yet still do it and refuse to sacrifice the pace to address it. Just take the L and work on your car, nothing complicated
You mean like they did when Merc were much faster and the others especially Red Bull couldn't stop crying about it? 😒
@@MegaIronica People seem to mention this a lot as if it's a good argument. Yes, that should not have been done and should not repeat now
@@sailor_seller I agree it should have been. But too late. It has been. And they have to stay consistent. Otherwise, they would be just singling out Mercedes.
@@MegaIronica the difference is those changes happened at the end of season. Remember how merc forced FIA to change pitstop rules and rear wing midway season because they dont want to take L against RB?
@@MegaIronica Very different circumstances now, Mercedes is willingly hurting their drivers.
Regulation changes are part of F1 they do it every so many years and every team complains when they are behind. Rule changes are to close up the pack and force innovation.
They should do nothing. Each team needs to fix it them selves. They can pay Newey a bag of $$$$
But, but..but Mercedes!
You know redbull experiences it too right?
Well said, must be fare to all !!
Agreed. FIA hasn't designed or built any of the cars so it is a team issue.
The teams need to resolve their own bouncing issues
@@dud8905 yeah but it does not hurt there drivers because they raise there ride height.
Risiking the drivers for the sake of performance has always been there , we've even reached extreme examples like the F-duct having people driving one handed.
The FIA should penalise Mercedes( or watever culprit team) for putting their drivers at risk instead of putting with their charade to bend the rules again to their advantage.
The issue is not the teams, it is the FIA making changes without letting teams have real testing and limiting how teams could engineer a fix.
@@flavious27 all teams had 2 years to design 2022 cars. you have been living under rock!
@@flavious27 ...what?!
@@flavious27 you've been embarrassing yourself under every comment, just stop
@@flavious27 There is a fix. Increase your ride height. And more, cuz teams like RB and Alpine got barely any porpoising while keeping their ride height to a minimum.
Bravo! I think you absolutely nailed it. The answer is probably the complete mix you outline. Add a 1 G safety limit to the rules. That stays forever more. Next year allow interters, the year after, active suspension with spec parts and constrained control laws.
And the year after that, Don't allow them to take fuel on board in any way.
How’s about the teams fix the problem since it’s their job.
Exactly
They know how to fix it, raise the ride height, but they don't want to cause it'll hurt performance too much.
One thing Mercedes could try is to lower top speed by 20 kph. Alonso already drove few years with GP2 engines so it can done easily I guess 😀
@@Soutar3DG that doesn't fix porpoising. That only prevents bottoming out. Did you not watch the video? lol
@@Tansle620 It does otherwise all teams would have the same issue.
1:56 'So porpoising can be removed within the rules'
That makes clear that it is an engineering problem, not a sport problem. It's on the teams to do whatever possible to protect the health of their drivers. They either raise the ride height, or they design a better car.
Any kind of FIA interference on this during this season only serves to damage the sport's integrity even further.
The problem is with that is that the FIA defines the rules around driver safety and implement penalties. So in this case, the FIA would need a rule that has negative consequences for teams that don't protect the drivers.
@@_taste ye exactly, it's already happening with every other safety rule.
Without safety rules there would be a dead body every couple of weeks. You haven't been around long have you? Teams only look for wins.
The negative consequences would be to black flag the cars that exceed safe g-loading as measured at the drivers seat.
@@_taste That I would agree with, but the rule should stay completely out of the engineering side of things.
Keep in mind teams ask the FIA to change the rules all the time to benefit themselves. RB petitioned for minimum weight increases because they couldn't get their car down to weight with the intention to prevent teams who solved the "weight problem" from benefiting more than they could. In that regard, what Mercedes is doing is entirely par for the course in F1, but I agree if you enforce something safety-related than you remove any dilemma on what to do, and that is the only reasonable way to deal with it for now.
Everyone had issues with the weight apart from alpha romeo because of short wheelbase. Just look at the teams in 2023 stripping off paint to save weight. But not everyone was suffering from porpoising. Raising car height only benefitted some teams. Moreover its causing more dirty air
One thing I'm sure of is that active suspension will be there soon or late. The ground effect begs for it. As I understand, one road bump can distort the balance and initiate bouncing, which so easily mitigated with an active suspension. They can start introducing it by making it a spec part for a couple of seasons. Btw, there is lots of kinetic power that can be recuperated.
P.S. (kidding) That's it, they are using porpoising dynamo.
Nothing, it's problem for Mercedes and other teams, who built a bad car
Mercedes are third in the championship, way better than the seven other teams, who would love to be third. Mercedes will find a solution, then they will be second behind Red Bull with Ferrari third crying in their red wine.
The problem is that the safety of the drivers is at risk, so the FIA should do something.
No they shouldn’t do anything (or impose a limit on purpoising)… it’s their decision to put their drivers safety at risk for the performance. Otherwise we might not see Hamilton in Q3 or even Q2 haha
I have admiration how Mercedes willingly put their drivers through these conditions eventho they have a solution to stop the porpoising from happening.
Then they play the safety card to force regulation changes what would help them develop a better car. Guess what team during the 2015-2021 era multiple times blocked suggestions f other teams to bring the field closer? So yeah, their own problem, they should find their own solution.
@@xavierandradev yes they should do something, make teams run their car safe, no rule changes, you build a shitbox, it’s your problem
What * MERCEDES should do about porpoising, either reduce performance or fix the issue
The vertical shock probably depends on which part of the car bottoms out during porpoising. Cars with the highest vertical acceleration are.probably bottoming out a really stiff part.of the structure, whereas Redbull may be bottoming out on the edges.of the floor (where they have some skid plates) which has a degree of flex. This should give a softer impact and lower vertical acceleration
I agree with the acceleration rule! Get it figured out or suffer the pace penalty.
So when Mercedes was at the top with a dominant car, everyone else was expected to play catch up but when they’re struggling then the fia should step in and regulate one of their biggest problems? How does that make sense?
this is a safety issue. And making rules for it wouldn't fix it for Merc, the reason porpoising happens is the car is too low, but if they higher the car it makes it slower. The regulating it would mean they had a minimum ride height, which would make Merc slower
how does limiting max Gs help the mercs?
You're missing the point. This is a valid safety concern. Safety is big on the FIA agenda. It's worth a look into. Merc's superior engine/chassis design of old wasn't a safety concern for anyone.
@@noahwillis9627 THis safety issue occurs mostly for Mercedes because they refuse to lift the car up because it's going to lose performance. Meaning, their car is simply not good enough for the new standards. Red Bull, Ferrari, Haas, Alpine, etc. don't have this problem. Go and smoke a reality filter my guy.
Right. Let Mercedes play catch up
That at least some of constructors have basically solved problem seems to indicate it's an engineering matter. Any talk related to this circuit or that not being suitable is off the table. Just because Merc (and others) haven't figured it out doesn't mean there needs to be massive rules changes or spending cap increases. I sympathize with Hamilton, it was hard to watch him exit his car, but it's on Merc to fix it. Toto (and the like) need to look inward for answers, not to papa FIA.
Its not about figuring it out... the current rules don't let them develop the fix fast enough... sliding scale, budget cap, open parts, stock parts, curfew times... Give them the buget and let them use it and in 3 races all will fix it
Mercedes could stop it today by increasing the ride height.
But that would make their design embarasingly slow. So they rather choose to destroy Hamiltons back.
Its a choice
@@cosminlesutan3574 nope. Completely false. Merc just cant fix it and stay fast. Thats it. They fd up when they tried to use as much of the W12 design as possible to save money.
Trouble is, apart from Red Bull, the other teams that 'solved the problem' are almost 3 seconds off the pace. How exactly is that good for F1??
@@alphatrion100 True! Will not happen tho. The Drivers are too egomaniacs and the teams need(want) every point so they (both!) rather risk their health for a few tenth. Still it´s the teams problem - not FIAs problem.
A max G /frequency/ 'max porpoising' would really be exactly what Merc is asking for, but also not what Merc is asiking for at all.
It would be the most fairest, not punishing the teams that solved it , while protecting all the drivers.
Merc would not like the outcome of a max G/freq limit as it would force them to make changes to fit into the 'safe zone' and they would likely fall further behind. Then are really angling for a minimum ride height that slows the cars that are currently able to run at lower ride heights without jeopardizing safety. It is interesting that a German manufacturer, that is dedicated to safety, would allow the team that openly states the car is unsafe in its current configuration to continue to run the car like that.
They could monitor a team over a weekend and warn them the first time the acceleration goes past 1g, every time afterwards in the season is a penalty.
If teams never touch the limit, good for them.
Exactly. This would force Merc to increase ride height for safety without punishing other teams.
Teams have free practise sessions to test how much the car will porpoise in race trim. So then when the race starts just black flag the teams who are porpoising too much. Bet next race their porpoising is gone.
By far, the most fair change for the current season would be to allow a minimum amount of porpoising, either by G force or frequency. Toto's solution is absurd, to go after RB for his own team's incompetence, all that while risking health of the guy who made him a billionaire. What a POS
Not to mention that, prior to the start of the season, the teams _unanimously_ agreed to not change the regulations around porpoising.
@@halofreak1990 wow didn't know that. So all is fine until Mercs don't get their way, typical
No, the solution is to increase budget cap.
Let them do limited track testing for like 10 hours (because the problem doesn't exist in wind tunnel).
@@gold9994 Is this sarcasm? You increase the budget cap and all Toto will do is spend it elsewhere and then still demand that Red Bull slow down.
@@gold9994 totally agree! Funny how f1 demanded all these extreme changes to the car and created a salary cap along with limited real world testing and to this point only one team has it figured out sort of. So much for increased competition.
This "safety" issue regarding porpoising only got loud when Mercedes upgrade package didn't worked as expected. Then we are hearing about this, from Merc bosses and drivers every single day. Not when rules were announced. Not in Barcelona shakedown. Just after the fail of their upgrades. And there are other cars with severe if not higher porpoising. Mercedes issue is not with safety. If it was they could solve that-lifting the car. Their problem is being too far behind and not getting ahead. Just politics. Other teams just did better and are making progress.
FIA should watch, study and step in but not with the ridiculous Mercedes solution. I think something like active suspension will have to come up in next year. Till then you should change rules, although the meatball flag is an interesting starting point.
They lowered the car further than before and now they're complaining about *their* bigger problem ... At the expensive of even Lewis his health ? Shame on you Mercedes !
Because the update fixed the problem, like we saw in Barcelona, but they are still off with the pace and out of budget.
To reconnect with the front of the field, they started this campain to have the rules changes in their favour by raising the ride hight. They hope this will cause enough loss in performance at Ferrari and Red Bull for them to reconnect and fight for victories.
its not just merc
Every race driver wants to drive the fastest car available, which means that they often neglects health for a faster lap time. I am pretty sure most of them have thought about them dying on the track before.
Gasly even said that the team asked him if he wanted to drive at a lower drive height even if it meant more porpoising. He of course said yes to the lower ride height.
@@snack711 It's certainly not Merc alone, it seems theirs isn't even the worst technically speaking, but it's definitely Merc crying about it the most and loudest... By far ! Other teams just raise their ride height instead.
I'm definitely in favour of "banning the problem" instead of "specifying a solution". We already have mandates on wing flex and max weight, up to the teams to decide how to get there. So something similar should be possible for the forces exerted on the driver.
That said I would also like the next generation of cars see active suspension, as we seem to be stuck with more city races for the foreseeable future it makes sense to me that we use this technology to improve car performance and safety.
F1 is supposed to have the highest levels of technology in the world of motor racing. Why they don't have active suspension I don't know. It's in your bog standard road car these days.
Whatever happens, irrespective of who is being affected (I am genuinely part of the "may the best car/team" win camp. Doesn't mean I can't feel happy/sad for anyone though, I'm only human), I do _not_ want to see _anyone_ in pain, let alone actively harmed, for my entertainment. I think that the FIA screwed up the regs so they should at least be a part of the solution.
(Btw, as a pro-EU Welsh mum to a bi daughter, and an A or demi son - he's not too sure himself - and the "adopted" mum of a trans woman, I often use the same flags as you! Only as an ally, I add 🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️🤝🏴🇪🇺. I think they go well together, don't you? ❤️)
@@y_fam_goeglyd why did you had to add that stuff in the end? What relevance does it add to a comment about motorsport?
@@y_fam_goeglyd Yeah I don't really have a "favourite" team or driver either. Really hope that they can find a solution that would actually make it a 3 or 4-way fight.
Also, thank you!
i think a gforce limit would be fine as a temporary measure, but really for me the suspension regs need looking at
tbh i would be surprised if we didnt see most teams with porpoising issues come out with new suspension designs at some point this season anyway. although that would obviously include a new gearbox casing, and i dont know if that would cause issues with the engine component limits?
If you can't turn up with a safe car, you shouldn't run. It's not the rules, it's a few design problems.
Oh really? Like last year mid season when the FIA made changes so the other cars could catch up to Mercedes right?? It only had a negative effect to Mercedes while helping all the others . I bet you didn't have a problem with that huh?
@@trance9158 mid season last year? What are you on about? If its the 2021 floor rules you are talking about, then you should know every teams agreed to the rules. Including Mercedes and AM.
@@trance9158 damn pal what have you smoked?
@@trance9158 the only change that happened last year mid-season was the new Pit-lane “safety” rule changes… and those only slowed down RedBull to be more on par with Mercedes
5:09 “I’m sure the FIA are looking into this properly”
Well that would be a first
Finally a good explanation of the issue and actual analysis of frequencies and amplitudes rather than saying its made up to slow other teams down. As Scarbs said, anything in range of 4-8Hz is dangerous to human body, maybe not immediately but if you add up all the hours over the year it can have serious impact. Its a well studied subject and there are diagrams and tables that show what is safe and what isnt and for how long. For example eigenfrequency of stomach is also around 5-7Hz so it can make you actually vomit. Interestingly, spine should have eigenfrequency of around 10-12Hz, which isnt on the chart Scarbs showed. Maybe if it was possible to modify the wind tunnel, teams could get rid of porpoising easier instead of throwing parts on the cars and testing on the track. Either way, very nice video analysis with actual proof of the problem.
Most teams used the wrong formula for porpoising in the windtunnel. Adrian Newey actually said in an interview that you can simulate porpoising with the right mathametical formula. He also said he knew from the start that porpoising could be a problem with these cars. Which explains the different suspension setup of RBR and why they build their car with a higher ride height in mind.
Newey did his uni thesis on ground effect and has worked on the ground effect cars of Indy and LMP. So he is experienced on the matter. Which makes it unsurprising why Red Bull have such a strong package.
@@zorbat5 no doubt Newey is the man when it comes to nailing new regulations and now that they have a really good PU i think we will see RedBull just run away with both championships. Also interesting how Alpine didnt bounce all that much given they were flying on the straights, although slow in the corners.
They can manually make the suspension stiffer on porpoising prone area, like how you use DRS on straights. But that is for next year
The FIA should sincerely simply do nothing. You broke it, you fix it.
The FIA must protect the drivers so it has to stepin at some point
@@drugoviic any specific driver or?
@@drugoviic No I completely disagree. RB proved it can be resolved within the regulations.
@@drugoviic "The FIA should protect Hamilton" your comment in a nutshell. I can't understand why Merc with it's budget fail to meet the necessary conditions for safe racing and then complain to FIA, this is absolutely unthinkable.
@@hbtm2951 yes the FIA should protect hamilton from himself, he wll always choose a bouncy low rde height car for perfomance
Lewis’ acting has really brought up a lot of drama and talking points.
Mercedes infamous porpoising isn’t even the worst among all the teams. Alpine and Haas have way more porpoising and I don’t hear old man Alonso complaining.
In fact, Mercedes is on par with Red Bull and less than Ferrari.
The graph they showed in this very video showed that Ferrari had the worst porpoising in Australia. Merc only 3rd behind them and haas.
Lol keep crying about it. Active suspension is coming back and Mercedes will rise again 😂
@Moctezuma García Of all the drivers on the grid Hamilton is the one that is the best at acting. I don't doubt he had back pain, but it is questionable if it was as much as it seemed. He knows how to act because we have seen it plenty of times in the past. And the interesting thing when he acts is that in his interviews he seems to then switch always to a much higher pitched voice compared to his usual interviews and that's how he sounded in Baku when he talked about how bad the pain was. On top of that if your pain is as bad as he says and if his back is as sore as he says, do you keep touching the spot constantly? I had a broken nose, and I did everything I could not to touch the nose because every touch was painful.
So glad you guys (& a few others) are continuing to break this porpoising issue down so people can understand it.
Keep up the good work and in following this story, especially the driver safety aspect of it.
Fully agree!
Push a max G rule and exceeding it simply means disqualification just as it is with minimum weight.
It is absolutely astonishing, that not a single driver complains about the risk of long term health effects.
Multiple drivers have complained about it including Sainz, Lewis, Russell, & Gasly.
Athletes are usually the last to be told they are risking their health.
@@witnessg431 do you really believe so lmao they are doing this just to gain performance ffs
@@karannsyt You can see that they are in pain after races and its pretty obvious that being shaken violently so much will impact your health. So yes I believe them.
@@witnessg431 lmaooo i would like to hear more from other drivers then, still looks like merc got annoyed and are playing the system
but if it is unanimous then i agree
The FIA doesn't need to do anything the teams torturing their drivers by letting the cars crash into the ground repetitively at 200 mph need to raise the ride height of their cars. Paul Di Resta said it continuously over the course of the race weekend. Of course that means they will lose performance. So instead of sooking to the FiA to bring in a minimum that penalises teams that have engineered the issue out do the right thing by your driver and raise the car. Performance at all costs by torturing your driver is not what its about its a team issue not a sport issue. Johnny Herbert said that its what used to happen when he was racing but they just put up with it. These days we have spoiled children in sport that want the millions of $ and be pampered along the way.
Apart from that’s not how any sports work anywhere. It’s always down to the regulators to enforce minimum safety requirements
Nobody is forcing them to drive in f1. Im sure there's plenty of other drivers that would be happy to take their seat.
@@plavyn exactly. That’s why Hamilton should stay home at next race while Mercedes fixes his car to be safe for him to drive.
@@MietoK not another one 🤦♂️ No sport has ever worked like this. All teams/sportsmen compete under their current regulation, and no professional athletes would give away performance. Otherwise none of them would ever turn up. Also, why are you talking about LH - 19 of the drivers have said it’s an issue
@@plavyn How about the teams actually Innovate instead of crying about unfair rules.
I completely agree. Also one other thing to note about the teams that have fixed it getting penalized, is that they also fixed this within the current cost cap era. It would be incredibly unfair for them to have possibly spent millions on fixing the issue for them to only have it taken away because other teams didn't fix it.
I've seen people arguing about the unfair team penalization by bring up Merc's DAS that got removed all the same but I think it doesn't compare as this was designed pre-cost cap, and IIRC would require cost capped money to replicate.
I completely agree wit hthis video. We were discussing this with my flatmates and a minimum ride height would be outrageous. This is about drivers' health.
People saying it would favour RB - yeah, but they put themselves in that position. The alternative (min ride height) is like telling everyone in the turbo hybrid era that there is a maximum power output of the engine, say 600 HP, so that Merc has no advantage. And while the FIA did try to reduce Merc's advantage, they never did anything extreme. And the FIA is actively reducing the advantage of any top team by introducing aero simulation limits and budget caps, so no, a maximum porpoising force would NOT be the same as penalising merc for being too fast in the previous years.
Hard call, not fair with those who found the solution, depending on the way FIA changes the rules, Mercedes for instance will get to the top, but only because of this change in something their engineers just couldn't solve using their out of the box concept, btw it was their choice
But they didn’t have the proposing problem in mind like the early red bull due to it being hard to simulate in a simulator.
EXACTLY!!
Oh you mean like the fIA completely nerfing the Mercedes , which mind you, they had planned to do in 2021. And we endured years of Horner btiching and moaning and threatening to leave the sport? lol
@@kingsleyndam To me just because mercedes cant fix it that doesn't mean FIA should make it easy for them. TBF, Redbull is doing magnificently good!! and if porpoising is an issue, why isnt Ferrari having any problems with it. People just want mercedes to have a walk through the park sort of scenario to let them win again, it is absolutely outrageous. Either Mercedes fix their issues with employing people who are good in aerodynamics, or increase the ride height and lose top speed or just dont race at all. But asking FIA to do something about it is just fucking childish. Its like going to your mother and complaining to her just because your sibling got a better portion of the steak. Mercedes and their fangirls are just childish. Just get good or dont race. Amateur team if you ask me. After winning 8 world championships and they are acting like this. Fucking stupid. If that is the case, why dont FIA Reduce the number of laps to 20 and let Ferrari dont have any issues with the engine?
@@alexvickery6153 Don't talk bullshit. Everyone knew porpoising would happen. It is their issue for not getting ahead of it and fixing it like Red Bull did. Their own fucking mistake. Now punish them by making them drive slower and with bigger ride height and make them fight Williams for 18th instead of changing regulations because someone is an idiot.
The fia shouldn't do anything, some teams have mastered the issue, others haven't. It is down to the teams to sort this issue as changing the regs will be unfair on the teams that are on top of it.
That’s what I meant when I first made the comment about the porpoising scrambling the brain as I had read about it in a medical journal warning parents not to shake their children in anger. It was amountable to physical abuse.
This vid is really illuminating and should be taken seriously by the FIA, the constructors, the drivers and the fans.
Mercedes went with a minimalist sidepod and have ended up with a massive area of unsupported floor that would probably still flex to meet the ground even if they changed the ride height. Is it any surprise that they can’t control the porpoising.
Performance vs safety. Is going 200mph safe? Is bringing you car to mechanical limits safe? Is porpoising where the line gets drawn? Its really a drivers issue.
Going 200 is safe the cars are tubs but going 200 in a car with sudden loss or additional grip is not
Whoah, i would love see you in that car for an entire race to validate that thesis.
Simple, during FP1, FP2 and FP3 the teams have to find a setting where the bouncing doesn't exceed 1G (or whatever number FIA decides). If the bouncing exceed that number during the race, they have to bring the car to the pits and raise the ride height or retire the car.
Exactly. I don't see why (extreme) porpoising would be okay during qualy? You've got 3 practice sessions to figure out how your car reacts to the track. Plenty of time to get things sorted out for qualifying. Breaking the rules during qualifying should result in penalties.
And it is no safety concern which should allow teams to change their cars between qualy an the race. The car should already have been safe (as in: no extreme porpoiing) during qualifying.
Nonsense, then you might as well give redbull the championship because ferrari wont be able to compete if thats the case because their car bounces as much as merc.
I think the FIA should find out what level of bouncing is harmful to the health longterm and then put the limit there. Whether it's 1G or 2G or 3G.
That would be stupid
The FIA knew about the problem and basically said it would improve competitiveness since teams will have to find ways to resolve it... Sensors on the driver would sole it somewhat
G Meyer in the cockpit.ans a G limit set for bouncing. all teams then have a limit to work towards.
It benefits teams that have good aero.
Are the graphs blurred out for everyone?? And why??
Three things of note:
1) Can they just have a seat cushion?
2) Five Hertz? Yes, it does.
3) Does F1 really make you blur the graphs?
the graphs were wrong.
@@louiscypher4186 then why show it at all
@@iroor they didn't want to have to redo the entire video.
@@louiscypher4186 why would you have to do the entire video. just remove the graphics, and put the guy explaining. I'm sure the webcam was on for the entirety of his commentary recording.
@@iroor I don't mean record everything from scratch. I mean the editor would have to go through the process of removing the graphics, inserting the footage of him talking, sync it with the audio. etc, etc.
Or they could just quickly and easy blur the graphics and reupload it. as you can see in the video they didn't even do a good job of blurring you can see exposed frames of all of them.
Simplest solution is the g-sensor, with an equally simple rule - a sliding scale of time penalties for shock loads above a certain threshold and number during a race.
As a short term fix would a modification of the "driver seat" by a gel cushion or suspension by harness work? It would be a massive disadvantage to those drivers that use it as they would be more isolated from the car but their spines would be in better shape at the end of the day.
The FIA should do nothing.
The teams should be responsible for their drivers safety and give them a save car.
If they fail to do so they should be disqualified from the race.
The challenge this year was Ground-effect 101.
Some teams failed, others succeeded.
In a normal world that would give consequences to those who failed not to those who succeeded.
Especially when you think that part of the GP is about the Constructors Championship and who builds the best car.
It's pure insanity to give in to Mercedes whining, yes, whining because they can reduce porpoising but then they have to admit that they are only the 4th or 5th team on the grid.
Instead they try to force a rule change.
I remember how Toto Wolff, last year, was always going on about how Red Bull will flounder on this years design because of their efforts to improve the car right until the last race.
And here we are. The team that makes no mistakes build one of the worst cars and now blame the rules instead of blaming their own design.
This. Nothing to add.
PREACH!
None of these solutions to me seem to be good, except the long term ones that are going to take a bit. I think that it should just be up to the teams to either fix their issue or have to deal with a sore/unhappy driver
Thats good until sth bad happens and everyone jumps the gun on how the new rules made F1 unsafe rather than taking responsibility, possibly reversing the new changes. Then it's back to merc domination and the staleness of T1 again
@@mohammadnashitsiddiqui2168 Merc dominanation = Bad
Redbull domination = Good
Gotta love the double standards….
@@MP422ownz yup
@@MP422ownz domination by half a billion budget, vs domination by a set of rules and limitations. Big difference. Let's see merc keep up within the budget
@@mohammadnashitsiddiqui2168 You do realise in the pre salary cap era RB/Merc/Ferrari all had comparable budgets lol
I agree with your suggestion with the tweek that the FAI could throw a meatball in any of the qualifing sessions and they would inforce the limit in Q1
A simple possible solution is to open up the wheels. Going back to wheel designs of 2021 or even further back will work to reduce pressure on the cars underside. While not a silver bullet, it could be a quick fix for the immediate issue.
For THIS year teams and drivers just need to get on with it. For the future I'd want to see the teams to be allowed a little bit better suspensions systems, the cars need to be seen to attack curbs better for visual excitement. 'Complex' or 'advanced' doesn't mean expensive these days, now we have a budget cap there should be more freedom
This, its fuckign F1 after all, not grassroot time racing. Its suposed to be the best of the best... active suspension. with todays monitoring could save SO MUCH pain.
And teams are already complaining they can't stay on budget. No, Merc dropped the ball and they should deal with it themselves
@@MrKelenek Active suspension is a huge rabbit hole and removes a ton of driver skill. Setting up proper weight transfer before a corner is a huge part of racing even in cars with such little suspension travel and as rigid as f1 cars they still have to manage the weight transfer. People forget how much load is on these cars the aerodynamic and g forces on these cars makes the load insane as does a full tank of fuel which drains over the course of the race meaning the drivers have to adapt more. If you put in active suspension it adds weight and reduces the difficulty on the driver tremendously you can change the ride height to transfer load regardless of what the driver does.
Also teams can tune wings to stall at certain angles then on the straights have the car set itself to raise the nose and lower the rear meaning even in non drs zones they have drs if their aerodynamics department is far enough ahead. Active suspension raises expense and weight, and reduces the need of a good driver it makes teams who can slip the best engineers a little cash under the table to lure them into their team the ones who will always win. F1 engineers even if they must be paid the same can work in other departments like designing road car aerodynamics and then get paid a ridiculous amount of money there. In f1's eyes it is legal because they are paying them very little but in the real world that isn't the case so the few engineers that can exploit that will go to the most wealthy teams. Active suspension is not required to mitigate this issue it's already a non issue for certain teams if they can do it then it's possible. With ABS we could stop brake lock up's and prevent drivers from crashing which hurts a lot more. With traction control we could prevent spins leading to multiple crashes if we keep adding electronics anyone who can handle the g-forces can drive them. It's as much about elite cars as elite drivers. Lets keep driver aid's out of it. Active suspension is probably one of the biggest driver aids possible.
Nothing really, its up to the teams to figure it out, some teams already solved it and some teams have minimal, just because a team cant or WONT increase ride height to solve it in order to gain performance at the risk of drivers health should not warant a fix and ruin the money/work other teams put into the car.
Spot on! Couldn't agree more
I fully agree aswell.
In this case its not the rule that is the issue. Its the team that looks more after points and performance then the health of their drivers. They should just increase the ride height and look at the bigger picture that health is more important then points and money.
I agree partially. I think it's just a bit worse. Lewis decides how fast he wants the car to be and what he can handle.
If Lewis says: "this is not safe for me, I will not do it".
or: "You can put the ride height this low if you want but then I will hold back on the straights because my back is killing me".
Then it would be over.
It's not the team's mistake (except for that they are not able to make a good car where other teams obviously CAN). The drivers say how they want the car to be set for the race and are responsible for their own safety.
Have you seen a video of boat racers? Hydroplanes? Off-shore tunnel boats? Those competitors get ROCKED!!
Here's my take as a former mechanical engineer: The porpoising is caused when the car is sucked too close to the ground. Install a pressure valve in the deck that opens at a predesigned vacuum pressure. This will prevent the car from nearing or striking the ground. Each team can adjust the valve pressure as they wish. They can use a servo and change the pressure for different parts of the course.
That would be considered a moveable aerodynamic device and therefore banned. Otherwise I believe that would have occurred already. This year I think teams just need to live with it but for next year I would hope they can have more complex suspensions to deal with it but they have made them unnecessarily simple. Every driver is dealing with it, just some cars handle it better than others but it is still there.
@@Bravo1VE I'm not familiar with the rules, but would this only be illegal if the device was mechanically operated. If there was a flap that can open each side of car that is built into the floor which can flex under the pressure created. Once the optimal pressure is created the flap is forced open thus negating the porpoising. The pressure required to open the flap could also be graded so less pressure = smaller opening, larger pressure = bigger opening.
@@PBellAU it is banned as what you describe is a movable aerodynamic device. Doesn’t matter how it is actuated, if is to change the aero effect it is banned.
UK health and safety law: ''It is an employer's duty to protect the health, safety and welfare of their employees and other people who might be affected by their work activities. Employers must do whatever is reasonably practicable to achieve this''. This is on Mercedes and the other teams endangering their own drivers and it is on them to stop, even if the driver wants to go faster.
100% agree. But gotta say, not sure these new regs in general are gonna be it for the future of F1.
It’s not though, this is professional sport and different rules apply. Go and make the above argument to a boxer 🤦♂️
@@plavyn boxers are not employees though, they are self employed athletes. 🤡
@@troythegardener really, are you sure about that 🤦♂️ What about rugby players or UFC fighters. Jesus, you guys are slow
@@plavyn You can't call people slow and then go and say that UFC fighters are employees
FIA should do nothing. It clearly affects the worse designed cars. All teams know how to property set up a car. If it is unsafe for some drivers, change the setup. Why not reduce the number of laps to 20? That way, maybe Ferrari engines could last to the chequered flag...
That's right. The FIA should do nothing and let spectators continue to fall asleep watching the procession they've given us this year. #NoFighting 🥱 😴
And how do you keep the teams from making sure the car unsafe for drivers? Ya, FIA rules.
@@Euclides287 there is far more fighting this year then during the turbo hybrid Mercedes time
Measure the vertical G forces and if it exceeds the track designated limit then delete the lap time during qualifying. No need to then worry about changes to parc fermme. The teams have plenty of time during the free practice sessions to ensure their car meets the limit. If it is a safety issue during racing it also a safety issue any time the cars are on track.
That is a realiteit good idea. Half way in the video I didnt see this one coming. But safety first without compromising the teams that have managed the bouncing. I’m not sure if this is what mercedes meant when they asked for a rule change.
After 10 years of turbo dominance with barely the season started. The Mercedes team is ordering the FiA to slow down the whole field because of driver's safety (porpoising). I don't think so.
2014 - 2022. That's not 10 years yet.
@@TheHarrie93 They didn't even dominate 2021 lol
@@walsh404 True true they only won their 8th consecutive constructors title. It wasn't utter domination so it doesn't count unless Merc wins by lapping car nr.3 with both their drivers its not counting as domination just as great racing and most of all competitive racing. GTFO Mercedes bot.
Great video as always. But the problem isnt purpoising. Its bottoming. A german youtuber made a video about this. Mercedes themselves said they got it in controll but they have a new problem which affects them the most and its called bottoming. Toto Wolff said you should listen to the onboard of Hamilton and Vettel in specific sectors and you can hear it. Mercedes car is stiffer than any other car and as a result of fixing purpoising they have to run it low and cant really make it higher. Toto again said that it cost them a whole second of running the car a bit higher to help both drivers. Other cars it affects is Alpha Tauri which you can listen to the onboard as well.
I've been thinking for a while that a vertical accn limit is the answer. Easy to implement. Easy to tweak the limits. Easy fix !
They already have active aero adjustments in the rules for the high-speed straights (DRS). They could devise a flap that opens a bit to reduce vacuum under the car on the long straights. It could even tie in to DRS activation, with software that would override the one-second follow requirement.
The trouble being that they want to have their cake and eat it too. If someone got smart and designed an anti porpoising valve for the underbody they could resolve the problem. Missing the great inventive Engineers now …
Merc the last seven years: “Oh we can’t change the regs, we got it right! The others just need to develop more?”
Merc 2022: “Hmm we are not in front. Regs are unfair and must be changed.”
Exactly. Dame Lewis should get an Oscar for that performance post race.
The regs were changed in 2017 and in 2021, Mercedes won the constructors during those years.
Two Brittish drivers! If it was happened to Red Bull, every was smiling.
@@rodolphendessabeka8721 those regs werent to slow down a dominating car. 2017 was for faster cars. 2021 was to slow down a bit because pirelli tires
@@theTutenstien Yes and in 2017 Ferrari mounted a challenge. In 2021 Redbull also mounted a challenge. Mercedes hasn't asked for the regs to be changed in their favor. I don't know where people get this stuff.
Lewis was told to play out the back pain. Amazing that his teammate didnt cry or hobble out of the car. Mercedes wants that free upgrade. Crying to the FIA
He also agreed to putting the car that low, knowing it would bounce. All games! I don't dispute him being in pain, but to agree to it and then cry is strange
Not a quick fix, but they should bring back active suspension; then they could alter the ride height to counter the porpoising on the fly.
Now that there is budget caps let them use tech”active suspension or whatever “ as the budget will lead to different solutions and cars could be fun imo
The FIA should do nothing.
1)raise your car
2) or make it softer
3) or apply engineering solutions and succeed.
Yeah like active suspension. But no, we cannot, because if they do let them use engineering solutions freely, Mercedes will destroy them all. That's why they have been removing year by year all engineering marvels Mercedes had in the past 8 years and was dominating.
FiA shouldn't do anything about something that occurs because of cars wanting to go faster and as low as possible. If they did the regulations would help make clones of cars as height would be strongly regulated. If teams can not suffer in current regulations why should the FiA step in? Yes F1 should be as safe as possible for drivers but that said, it's supposedly the cutting edge of technology.
I agree that teams should be punished depending on how good or ba they make their cars. However hasnt the fia already set precedents from years before form banning party mode for intance among others to bring competition closer. Granted its the first year of the new regs, the cars in baku were miles off each other 1st leading 2nd by 20 seconds and so on and so forth. If a limit is put on say ride height wouldnt cars like redbull just run away with the tittles like mercs did in 14
No, teams will always push for performance ahead of driver safety. The FIA is there to ensure driver safety, so they need to step in.
I wonder if the bouncing is also from the streets. If they did well in Spain what if it’s because it was a purpose made track? Mercedes has to suffer through Monaco, Baku, and Canada all within a month or so. Maybe will improve when we go back to a regular track built for racing?
Monitor for G with a cockpit sensor. Anything over 1G in qualifying and the lap time is deleted. Any/every incident of frequency over 1G in the race = 5 second penalty added to their race time at the end. That incentivises the teams to take it seriously, without having to DSQ cars. Alternatively deduct/delete constructors' points if they go over 1G during qualifying or the race.
They should do nothing about it. Lewis put a show on getting out of the car. Between his show and Toto's comments saying Lewis may not be racing in Canada, all that happened to try and convince the FIA to fix the problem Mercedes inflicted on themselves with the zero side pod design. Mercedes needs to own their mistake that they completely designed a horrible car
Solution, raise the ride height until they figure it out. For 8 years they have dominated and now that they are a midfield team they can't take it. Go cry somewhere else
With you 100% on this one. Raise your own height Toto- protect your drivers.
Active Venturi-Aero with a Height Sensor Mounted on the Suspension, regulating the Car-Height. Would also not affect the other Aero-Parts like Frontwing etc. And also minimal to no Risk of "Greyzoning" in the Rulebooks.
well a damper oscillator has a wider and lower response, the amplitude should go down, but you can get into resonance of a broader frequency range. The wikipedia page on "(forced damped simple) harmonic oscillator" covers it well.
Tuned mass damper. There. Fixed it
Edit: maybe I should wait until the end of the video to comment.
Would love to see active suspension return with modern computers, but with some kind of provision in the rules to prevent teams from simply 'memorizing' the best ride height for each centimeter of track, like they did in the '80s. Improved active suspension control algorithms could also trickle down to road cars.
make it spec'ed then
Why was them utilizing the best ride height for each section of the track a bad thing? Wouldn't everyone just be maximizing performance?
@@__D_I_M The point is to have a system that works equally well for any track; and automatically adjusts to changing conditions (eg: wind, a new bump in the road that wasn't there last year, less/more fuel in the tank, changing stiffness of tires as they warm up etc...). A much more universal solution is desirable than rote memorization of each track. If they work on developing that, the software can be transferred to road cars. If they just create a map of ride heights for every corner of each F1 track, it's useless to everyone else.
Enough teams have managed pretty solid workarounds to the problem, maintain a low ride height and still post decent numbers. Somewhere in the half melted Airfix kit that is the Silver car is some speed advantage other engineers have overlooked OR thought of and discarded that is only kept in check by porpoising at a low ride height. Rule changes that only beneift a small number of teams while providing no or negative benefit to others defy the sporting aspect of the competition.
As always Scott - a genuine racer’s solution.
The FIA don't need to do anything, some teams have been able to solve this so the rules work in that regard. If a team can't stop it then their design is not working, it should be up to them to adhere to the rules and make it work, like some teams already have.
No team has solved it. Why does this misinformation keep getting repeated?
@@saintsalieri Red Bull have more or less.
@@Gintonious I'm not looking forward to a two car grand prix though, are you? With Verstappen on pole (having gotten a tow from Checo) and the lap 1 radio message to Perez: "No fighting, you're on different strategies."
@@Gintonious Read link. Then shut up then erase your post. This is another Redbull driver
Gasly
www.planetf1.com/news/pierre-gasly-drivers-cane-aged-30/
@@saintsalieri you mean like it’s been with Merc for the past 8 years or so? Funny that they are the most vocal about it as well. They designed their car, not the FIA. If it’s lacking performance etc, that on them
I think Hamilton was giving a masterclass in acting when he got out of the car after baku
He was the only one crying which makes it highly suspect
I haven't seen anything about the effect that new low-profile tires might have on this problem. They are not as compliant as the older design. Also, what about the effect of the new underbody aero in combination. To my eye it only looks bad in the braking zones after high-speed straights. Maybe the combination of under and over the car aero is causing a stall. Good call.
What if the corner of the floor is attachet to the rear suspension so it moves with the wheel by flexinf a bit? So the ground effect is pushing down the wheel, instead of the body. I remember I read something similar when the new rules were announced.
One thing that would need to be done with the proposed short term solution is that a team would end up further down the grid for the race so they wouldn't just go with the worst purpoising possible, set a pole then, then get to make changes to the car and still keep the pole.
The FIA shouldn't put new regulations in place like minimum ride height. Mercedes runs the lowest car on purpose and then complains there is purpoising. Yeah no shit Sherlock there is purpoising because you setup your car in a way that gives you a ton of purpoising. It was there in all Free Practice sessions in Baku. Mercedes thinks if they can setup their car as bad as possible for purpoising they can force the FIA to make some change in their favour.
Mercedes' and Lewis' unnecessary drama dug their own grave again 😂
I personally would absolutely not like FIA intervene over this situation, as you've said in the video (so I agree with you). And here's why.
If all the teams would have issues with porpoising and none of them could actually improve it and still be competitive, then I would agree on the fact that it's not team's fault for having this issue.
But that is not the case. There are teams which have managed to find both low porpoising and high performance.
What this means is that Mercedes could not find this sweet spot and now they're pressuring the FIA to take measures to ensure that those teams who've actually managed to solve the issue, are penalized on pace by applying some regulations.
This is tremendously unfair.
If your team isn't capable to deliver a good car without porpoising, don't just ask for rules to be introduced so that other teams who've done that, get brought back to your pace.
There is no safety involved here. The solution is very simple. Raise the height of the car if you want to improve safety and you're unable to come with an alternative solution like RedBull.
This has been my argument!! It's the FIA that introduced the ground effect so why aren't they atleast helping the teams sort it. They just gone "we've changed all the regulations", teams saying "it's not working and causing unstable cars" either fia replying "not our problem, it's yours".
Doesn't seem right to .e
I’m curious to know if the FIA was aware porpoising was going to become an issue?
Are any of the technical changes mandated by the FIA tested, either in real test conditions or computer simulations.
They should have known, it was one of the reasons for banning these ground effect cars when they first popped up
From what I've heard, porpoising is difficult to simulate in cfd and wind tunnels cannot create airflow to simulate a car going 300+ kph so they use downscaled models which lets them use slower air to create similar effects. However porpoising didn't seem to happen as much on these models. I am by no means an expert on this so feel free to correct me
They knew, it was an understood problem back in the day that's why the side skirts were added.
Allegedly regulations to address porpoising in advance was brought up late last year, but voted down. Russell has said to the effect that Merc was probably one of those teams that voted against.
@@Livlifetaistdeth and now fia doesnt come with a new idea to prevent that They get rid of the skirt and do nothing, Just chaneling the air from here to here this side to that side hoping that can stop porpoising completely. I thought they have learned from the 80s by bringing back ground effect
The FIA shouldn't do anything... It's a Mercedes problem, not an F1 problem.
All teams solved it, except for Mercedes and Ferrari. And Ferrari isn't moaning about it.
It's a compromise between safety and performance. Mercedes choose the latter as their main focus.
A change in the regs, will be desastrous for all teams, considering the budget cap.
The teams won't be standing in line, to spend their dollars and start from scratch to fix a 'problem' that all the teams already solved.
Mercedes clearly missed the boat on the 2022 regs. Well, bummer, but better luck next year.
They were dominant since the V6 hybrid era while Renault and Honda missed that boat.
Did the moan to the FIA that the engine regs should be changed?
Mercedes fangirls wont like it. To me just because mercedes cant fix it that doesn't mean FIA should make it easy for them. TBF, Redbull is doing magnificently good!! and if porpoising is an issue, why isnt Ferrari having any problems with it. People just want mercedes to have a walk through the park sort of scenario to let them win again, it is absolutely outrageous. Either Mercedes fix their issues with employing people who are good in aerodynamics, or increase the ride height and lose top speed or just dont race at all. But asking FIA to do something about it is just fucking childish. Its like going to your mother and complaining to her just because your sibling got a better portion of the steak. Mercedes and their fangirls are just childish. Just get good or dont race. Amateur team if you ask me. After winning 8 world championships and they are acting like this. Fucking stupid.
Every team has porpoising. Ferrari seems to have it worst, followed by Mercedes and (in Baku) McLaren and Alpha Tauri. Gasly and Ricciardo were wrecked by their cars. Leclerc is too young n dumb to admit the toll this is taking on his body.
Look up what happens to luge athletes with vibrations. Scary stuff.
@@Dharshanth.k What did RedBull do throughout all the Hyrbid era? Complain and got Mercedes parts banned, same with the Hakkinen/Schumacher rivalry, and again same throughout the V8 era. Welcome to F1…
Read link. Then shut up, Then erase your post. This is another Redbull driver
Gasly
www.planetf1.com/news/pierre-gasly-drivers-cane-aged-30/
Am I right to think ride-height is less critical on the straights? Perhaps a mechanism to raise the ride-height on the straight and allow it to return to their settings elsewhere. A simple approach could be to link the ride-height rise to the use of DRS. Just a thought.
What's better than Scarbs?
Good mic-quality Scarbs!