Ferrari letter prompts row over 2017 Formula 1 suspension designs

Leading Formula 1 teams could be forced to revise their suspension systems on the eve of the 2017 season following a Ferrari query over technology pioneered by Mercedes

Ferrari letter prompts row over 2017 Formula 1 suspension designs

The champion team is among those developing fully-legal hydraulic systems to improve chassis stability following the effective ban on FRIC (Front and Rear InterConnected) suspension in 2014.

Mercedes has placed a heave (or third suspension element) behind the rocker assembly to control vertical displacement of the suspension.

The benefits of the system were clear in 2016, but it is now under the microscope after Ferrari queried the use of such concepts in correspondence with the FIA before Christmas.

Red Bull could also be affected, having managed to exploit once again the radical rake angles integral to its aerodynamic concept.

Writing to the FIA to discuss whether new ideas on other cars are legal is common practice for F1 teams.

FERRARI'S QUERY TO FIA

In a letter to F1 race director Charlie Whiting, circulated to all teams, Ferrari's chief designer Simone Resta said his team was considering a system that could replicate FRIC without a physical connection between the front and the rear of the car.

The issue was whether these systems breached the catch-all article 3.15 of F1's technical regulations that effectively outlaws moveable aerodynamic devices, as they could help the car's aerodynamic characteristics.

"We are considering a family of suspension devices that we believe could offer a performance improvement through a response that is a more complex function of the load at the wheels than would be obtained through a simple combination of springs, dampers and inerters," wrote Resta.

"In all cases they would be installed between some combination of the sprung part of the car and the two suspension rockers on a single axle, and achieve an effect similar to that of a FRIC system without requiring any connection between the front and rear of the car.

"All suspension devices in question feature a moveable spring seat and they use energy recovered from wheel loads and displacements to alter the position of the heave spring.

"Their contribution to the primary purpose of the sprung suspension - the attachment of the wheels to the car in a manner which isolates the sprung part from road disturbances - is small, while their effect on ride height and hence aerodynamic performance is much larger, to the extent that we believe it could justify the additional weight and design complexity.

"We would therefore question the legality of these systems under Art. 3.15 and its interpretation in TD/002-11, discriminating between whether certain details are 'wholly incidental to the main purpose of the suspension system' or 'have been contrived to directly affect the aerodynamic performance of the car'."

Resta specified that Ferrari's concern was over components that exhibited either:

"1) displacement in a direction opposed to the applied load over some or all of its travel, regardless of the source of the stored energy used to achieve this.

"Or

"2) a means by which some of the energy recovered from the forces and displacements at the wheel can be stored for release at a later time to extend a spring seat or other parts of the suspension assembly whose movement is not defined by the principally vertical suspension travel of the two wheels."

WHITING: CONCEPTS 'CONTRAVENE' RULES

Whiting responded that any suspension system that acted in such a way was not in compliance with the regulations.

"In our view any suspension system which was capable of altering the response of a cars' suspension system in the way you describe in paragraphs 1) and 2) would be likely to contravene article 3.15 of the F1 technical regulations," he wrote.

Although Whiting's response would appear to outlaw the use of the trick suspension technology, it is understood teams affected have queried the situation.

As talks continue, any team running a device that could be interpreted as breaching the rules now faces a dilemma over whether to commit to it in its 2017 design but risk a final ruling outlawing the concept, or pursue an alternative system that may not be as competitive.

Additional reporting by Franco Nugnes

shares
comments
Ricciardo: Red Bull best long-term F1 bet despite Mercedes opening

Previous article

Ricciardo: Red Bull best long-term F1 bet despite Mercedes opening

Next article

Haas F1 team could now build its own car - Romain Grosjean

Haas F1 team could now build its own car - Romain Grosjean
Load comments

About this article

Series Formula 1
Teams Ferrari
Author Jonathan Noble
The toe-in-water origins of Lotus’s groundbreaking F1 journey Plus

The toe-in-water origins of Lotus’s groundbreaking F1 journey

In the first part of our history of Lotus, DAMIEN SMITH recalls how Formula 1 wasn’t an immediate priority for team founder Colin Chapman – but once he got a taste for it he just couldn’t stop…

How Hamilton’s qualifying record compares to Senna and Schumacher Plus

How Hamilton’s qualifying record compares to Senna and Schumacher

Lewis Hamilton has just become the first driver to record 100 world championship Formula 1 pole positions. Time to revisit a debate we discussed when he reached 150 front row starts in 2020.

Formula 1
May 8, 2021
Why sustainability is being mandated by F1 Plus

Why sustainability is being mandated by F1

Continuing to be socially acceptable as public views shift globally is vitally important to the future of motor racing, says PAT SYMONDS - especially in Formula 1, the championship that represents the technological peak

Formula 1
May 8, 2021
The Barcelona practice times that prove Red Bull's title credentials, and heap pressure on Verstappen Plus

The Barcelona practice times that prove Red Bull's title credentials, and heap pressure on Verstappen

Lewis Hamilton and Mercedes led the way in Friday practice for the 2021 Spanish Grand Prix, but there was one big encouraging sign for Red Bull. The trouble is, it looks like making good on that gain will require its superstar driver to avoid repeating a mistake made today that left him well down the FP2 order

Formula 1
May 7, 2021
Why McLaren doesn’t doubt Ricciardo can escape his ‘dark’ place Plus

Why McLaren doesn’t doubt Ricciardo can escape his ‘dark’ place

Three points finishes from as many starts represents a decent opening innings on paper, but Daniel Ricciardo has endured a tough start to his McLaren career - only magnified his team-mate's excellent form. Yet both he and the team have good reason to expect a turnaround soon

Formula 1
May 6, 2021
What needs to “change” for Red Bull is ending Verstappen’s errors Plus

What needs to “change” for Red Bull is ending Verstappen’s errors

OPINION: Going up against the dominant force of Mercedes and Lewis Hamilton was always going to demand the best from Red Bull and Max Verstappen. But after making a couple more errors during the Portuguese Grand Prix, the Dutch driver showed there's a small gap he still needs to close in the 2021 Formula 1 title fight

Formula 1
May 5, 2021
The "subtle" Red Bull upgrades that kept it in the Portugal F1 mix Plus

The "subtle" Red Bull upgrades that kept it in the Portugal F1 mix

Red Bull's Portuguese Grand Prix fortunes were decidedly second best to Mercedes', but the result skews the potential that the team had at Portimao. With a new set of updates, the team looks good going forward into the rest of 2021's spicy F1 competition

Formula 1
May 3, 2021
Portuguese Grand Prix Driver Ratings Plus

Portuguese Grand Prix Driver Ratings

The 2021 Portuguese GP will for several drivers go down as a weekend of missed opportunities amid imperfect track conditions that caused struggles with tyre warmup. But the performances of a select few stood out from the crowd

Formula 1
May 3, 2021