"FIA TAKES STEPS TO REDUCE PORPOISING IN THE INTERESTS OF SAFETY

FIA TAKES STEPS TO REDUCE PORPOISING IN THE INTERESTS OF SAFETY
16.06.22

Following the eighth round of this year’s FIA Formula One World
Championship, during which the phenomenon of aerodynamic oscillations
(“porpoising”) of the new generation of Formula 1 cars, and the effect
of this during and after the race on the physical condition of the
drivers was once again visible, the FIA, as the governing body of the
sport, has decided that, in the interests of the safety, it is necessary
to intervene to require that the teams make the necessary adjustments to
reduce or to eliminate this phenomenon.

A Technical Directive has been issued to give guidance to the teams
about the measures the FIA intends to take to tackle the problem. These
include:

1. Closer scrutiny of the planks and skids, both in terms of their
design and the observed wear

2. The definition of a metric, based on the car’s vertical acceleration,
that will give a quantitative limit for acceptable level of vertical
oscillations. The exact mathematical formula for this metric is still
being analysed by the FIA, and the Formula 1 teams have been invited to
contribute to this process.

In addition to these short-term measures, the FIA will convene a
technical meeting with the Teams in order to define measures that will
reduce the propensity of cars to exhibit such phenomena in the medium term.

The FIA has decided to intervene following consultation with its doctors
in the interests of safety of the drivers. In a sport where the
competitors are routinely driving at speeds in excess of 300km/h, it is
considered that all of a driver’s concentration needs to be focused on
that task and that excessive fatigue or pain experienced by a driver
could have significant consequences should it result in a loss of
concentration. In addition, the FIA has concerns in relation to the
immediate physical impact on the health of the drivers, a number of whom
have reported back pain following recent events."

<https://www.fia.com/news/fia-takes-steps-reduce-porpoising-interests-safety>

On Friday, 17 June 2022 at 07:21:47 UTC+1, Brian Lawrence wrote:
> "FIA TAKES STEPS TO REDUCE PORPOISING IN THE INTERESTS OF SAFETY
>
> FIA TAKES STEPS TO REDUCE PORPOISING IN THE INTERESTS OF SAFETY
> 16.06.22
>
> Following the eighth round of this year’s FIA Formula One World
> Championship, during which the phenomenon of aerodynamic oscillations
> (“porpoising”) of the new generation of Formula 1 cars, and the effect
> of this during and after the race on the physical condition of the
> drivers was once again visible, the FIA, as the governing body of the
> sport, has decided that, in the interests of the safety, it is necessary
> to intervene to require that the teams make the necessary adjustments to
> reduce or to eliminate this phenomenon.
>
>
> A Technical Directive has been issued to give guidance to the teams
> about the measures the FIA intends to take to tackle the problem. These
> include:
>
> 1. Closer scrutiny of the planks and skids, both in terms of their
> design and the observed wear
>
> 2. The definition of a metric, based on the car’s vertical acceleration,
> that will give a quantitative limit for acceptable level of vertical
> oscillations. The exact mathematical formula for this metric is still
> being analysed by the FIA, and the Formula 1 teams have been invited to
> contribute to this process.
>
> In addition to these short-term measures, the FIA will convene a
> technical meeting with the Teams in order to define measures that will
> reduce the propensity of cars to exhibit such phenomena in the medium term.
>
> The FIA has decided to intervene following consultation with its doctors
> in the interests of safety of the drivers. In a sport where the
> competitors are routinely driving at speeds in excess of 300km/h, it is
> considered that all of a driver’s concentration needs to be focused on
> that task and that excessive fatigue or pain experienced by a driver
> could have significant consequences should it result in a loss of
> concentration. In addition, the FIA has concerns in relation to the
> immediate physical impact on the health of the drivers, a number of whom
> have reported back pain following recent events."
>
>
>
> <https://www.fia.com/news/fia-takes-steps-reduce-porpoising-interests-safety>
So "we'll look at things more closely and scratch our chins" and "we'll do some maths
at some point in the future and that will tell us something".

Good of them to have a finished article ready for publication.

In all seriousness though, if we assume that cars such as the Merc have been run
in a mechanically bouncing manner as that is the fastest way to run the car,
surely all this will do is hamper teams like Merc further compared to teams like
RBR which appear to have less of the same issue.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2022 00:51:52 -0700 (PDT), Matt Larkin wrote:

> On Friday, 17 June 2022 at 07:21:47 UTC+1, Brian Lawrence wrote:
>> "FIA TAKES STEPS TO REDUCE PORPOISING IN THE INTERESTS OF SAFETY
>>
>> FIA TAKES STEPS TO REDUCE PORPOISING IN THE INTERESTS OF SAFETY
>> 16.06.22
>>
>> Following the eighth round of this year’s FIA Formula One World
>> Championship, during which the phenomenon of aerodynamic oscillations
>> (“porpoising”) of the new generation of Formula 1 cars, and the effect
>> of this during and after the race on the physical condition of the
>> drivers was once again visible, the FIA, as the governing body of the
>> sport, has decided that, in the interests of the safety, it is
>> necessary to intervene to require that the teams make the necessary
>> adjustments to reduce or to eliminate this phenomenon.
>>
>>
>> A Technical Directive has been issued to give guidance to the teams
>> about the measures the FIA intends to take to tackle the problem. These
>> include:
>>
>> 1. Closer scrutiny of the planks and skids, both in terms of their
>> design and the observed wear
>>
>> 2. The definition of a metric, based on the car’s vertical
>> acceleration, that will give a quantitative limit for acceptable level
>> of vertical oscillations. The exact mathematical formula for this
>> metric is still being analysed by the FIA, and the Formula 1 teams have
>> been invited to contribute to this process.
>>
>> In addition to these short-term measures, the FIA will convene a
>> technical meeting with the Teams in order to define measures that will
>> reduce the propensity of cars to exhibit such phenomena in the medium
>> term.
>>
>> The FIA has decided to intervene following consultation with its
>> doctors in the interests of safety of the drivers. In a sport where the
>> competitors are routinely driving at speeds in excess of 300km/h, it is
>> considered that all of a driver’s concentration needs to be focused on
>> that task and that excessive fatigue or pain experienced by a driver
>> could have significant consequences should it result in a loss of
>> concentration. In addition, the FIA has concerns in relation to the
>> immediate physical impact on the health of the drivers, a number of
>> whom have reported back pain following recent events."
>>
>>
>>
>> <https://www.fia.com/news/fia-takes-steps-reduce-porpoising-interests-
safety>
> So "we'll look at things more closely and scratch our chins" and "we'll
> do some maths at some point in the future and that will tell us
> something".
>
> Good of them to have a finished article ready for publication.
>
> In all seriousness though, if we assume that cars such as the Merc have
> been run in a mechanically bouncing manner as that is the fastest way to
> run the car,
> surely all this will do is hamper teams like Merc further compared to
> teams like RBR which appear to have less of the same issue.

I don't have a problem with that, seems like they have listened to drivers
saying this is going to cause injury & basically said they cant run a car
in a way that is likely to injure the driver.

--
One good reason why computers can do more work than people is that they
never have to stop and answer the phone.

Matt Larkin wrote:

> On Friday, 17 June 2022 at 07:21:47 UTC+1, Brian Lawrence wrote:
> > "FIA TAKES STEPS TO REDUCE PORPOISING IN THE INTERESTS OF SAFETY
> >
> > FIA TAKES STEPS TO REDUCE PORPOISING IN THE INTERESTS OF SAFETY
> > 16.06.22
> >
> > Following the eighth round of this year’s FIA Formula One World
> > Championship, during which the phenomenon of aerodynamic
> > oscillations (“porpoising”) of the new generation of Formula 1
> > cars, and the effect of this during and after the race on the
> > physical condition of the drivers was once again visible, the FIA,
> > as the governing body of the sport, has decided that, in the
> > interests of the safety, it is necessary to intervene to require
> > that the teams make the necessary adjustments to reduce or to
> > eliminate this phenomenon.
> >
> >
> > A Technical Directive has been issued to give guidance to the teams
> > about the measures the FIA intends to take to tackle the problem.
> > These include:
> >
> > 1. Closer scrutiny of the planks and skids, both in terms of their
> > design and the observed wear
> >
> > 2. The definition of a metric, based on the car’s vertical
> > acceleration, that will give a quantitative limit for acceptable
> > level of vertical oscillations. The exact mathematical formula for
> > this metric is still being analysed by the FIA, and the Formula 1
> > teams have been invited to contribute to this process.
> >
> > In addition to these short-term measures, the FIA will convene a
> > technical meeting with the Teams in order to define measures that
> > will reduce the propensity of cars to exhibit such phenomena in the
> > medium term.
> >
> > The FIA has decided to intervene following consultation with its
> > doctors in the interests of safety of the drivers. In a sport where
> > the competitors are routinely driving at speeds in excess of
> > 300km/h, it is considered that all of a driver’s concentration
> > needs to be focused on that task and that excessive fatigue or pain
> > experienced by a driver could have significant consequences should
> > it result in a loss of concentration. In addition, the FIA has
> > concerns in relation to the immediate physical impact on the health
> > of the drivers, a number of whom have reported back pain following
> > recent events."
> >
> >
> >
> >
<https://www.fia.com/news/fia-takes-steps-reduce-porpoising-interests-safety>
> So "we'll look at things more closely and scratch our chins" and
> "we'll do some maths at some point in the future and that will tell
> us something".
>
> Good of them to have a finished article ready for publication.
>
> In all seriousness though, if we assume that cars such as the Merc
> have been run in a mechanically bouncing manner as that is the
> fastest way to run the car, surely all this will do is hamper teams
> like Merc further compared to teams like RBR which appear to have
> less of the same issue.

Yes but that is as it should be.

I am pleased to see the FIA have taken what I thought would be a
sensible and equitable approach.

"The teams designed the cars, not F1, so it is up to the teams
to address safety concerns of their designs. If Russell thinks his and
other teams need some regs to make them limit the problem then you need
just two things. A manner of measuring the effect and a regulation
defining "safe" limits. Any team can change their setup to limit
porpoising they will just be slower. Of course this would write off the
season for some teams and promote others."

--
Bozo Bin
Alan Baker
Texasgate

Matt Larkin <matthew.larkin@gmail.com> wrote:

> surely all this will do is hamper teams like Merc further compared to teams like
> RBR which appear to have less of the same issue.
>
Indeed, but that is as it should be. Mercedes seem to have designed a car
that is only competitive when it is bashing the living daylights out of its
drivers. It is right that the regulator, i.e. the FIA, should introduce
measures to protect the drivers when the teams, in the interests of
competitiveness, might be reluctant to do so. As I understand it the
problem is quite easy to alleviate (presumably by raising the ride height
or similar measures) but it would be grossly unfair to teams that have got
it right to introduce mandatory changes that would disadvantage them.

Having said that, it is slightly irritating that, in the past, RBR have
succeeded in getting various MB innovations banned (“party mode”, DAS etc)
because they couldn’t match them or hadn’t thought of them.

--
Sir Tim

On 6/17/2022 5:04 AM, Bigbird wrote:
> Matt Larkin wrote:
>
>> On Friday, 17 June 2022 at 07:21:47 UTC+1, Brian Lawrence wrote:
>>> "FIA TAKES STEPS TO REDUCE PORPOISING IN THE INTERESTS OF SAFETY
>>>
>>> FIA TAKES STEPS TO REDUCE PORPOISING IN THE INTERESTS OF SAFETY
>>> 16.06.22
>>>
>>> Following the eighth round of this year’s FIA Formula One World
>>> Championship, during which the phenomenon of aerodynamic
>>> oscillations (“porpoising”) of the new generation of Formula 1
>>> cars, and the effect of this during and after the race on the
>>> physical condition of the drivers was once again visible, the FIA,
>>> as the governing body of the sport, has decided that, in the
>>> interests of the safety, it is necessary to intervene to require
>>> that the teams make the necessary adjustments to reduce or to
>>> eliminate this phenomenon.
>>>
>>>
>>> A Technical Directive has been issued to give guidance to the teams
>>> about the measures the FIA intends to take to tackle the problem.
>>> These include:
>>>
>>> 1. Closer scrutiny of the planks and skids, both in terms of their
>>> design and the observed wear
>>>
>>> 2. The definition of a metric, based on the car’s vertical
>>> acceleration, that will give a quantitative limit for acceptable
>>> level of vertical oscillations. The exact mathematical formula for
>>> this metric is still being analysed by the FIA, and the Formula 1
>>> teams have been invited to contribute to this process.
>>>
>>> In addition to these short-term measures, the FIA will convene a
>>> technical meeting with the Teams in order to define measures that
>>> will reduce the propensity of cars to exhibit such phenomena in the
>>> medium term.
>>>
>>> The FIA has decided to intervene following consultation with its
>>> doctors in the interests of safety of the drivers. In a sport where
>>> the competitors are routinely driving at speeds in excess of
>>> 300km/h, it is considered that all of a driver’s concentration
>>> needs to be focused on that task and that excessive fatigue or pain
>>> experienced by a driver could have significant consequences should
>>> it result in a loss of concentration. In addition, the FIA has
>>> concerns in relation to the immediate physical impact on the health
>>> of the drivers, a number of whom have reported back pain following
>>> recent events."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
> <https://www.fia.com/news/fia-takes-steps-reduce-porpoising-interests-safety>
>> So "we'll look at things more closely and scratch our chins" and
>> "we'll do some maths at some point in the future and that will tell
>> us something".
>>
>> Good of them to have a finished article ready for publication.
>>
>> In all seriousness though, if we assume that cars such as the Merc
>> have been run in a mechanically bouncing manner as that is the
>> fastest way to run the car, surely all this will do is hamper teams
>> like Merc further compared to teams like RBR which appear to have
>> less of the same issue.
>
> Yes but that is as it should be.
>
> I am pleased to see the FIA have taken what I thought would be a
> sensible and equitable approach.
>
> "The teams designed the cars, not F1, so it is up to the teams
> to address safety concerns of their designs. If Russell thinks his and
> other teams need some regs to make them limit the problem then you need
> just two things. A manner of measuring the effect and a regulation
> defining "safe" limits. Any team can change their setup to limit
> porpoising they will just be slower. Of course this would write off the
> season for some teams and promote others."
>
>

Time to break out the texts on aeromechanical control theory.

So Merc still has a good photo album.

Allow active suspension.

Sir Tim <no_email@invalid.invalid> writes:
> Matt Larkin <matthew.larkin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> surely all this will do is hamper teams like Merc further compared
>> to teams like
>> RBR which appear to have less of the same issue.
>>
> Indeed, but that is as it should be. Mercedes seem to have designed a car
> that is only competitive when it is bashing the living daylights out of its
> drivers. It is right that the regulator, i.e. the FIA, should introduce
> measures to protect the drivers when the teams, in the interests of
> competitiveness, might be reluctant to do so. As I understand it the
> problem is quite easy to alleviate (presumably by raising the ride height
> or similar measures) but it would be grossly unfair to teams that have got
> it right to introduce mandatory changes that would disadvantage them.
>
> Having said that, it is slightly irritating that, in the past, RBR have
> succeeded in getting various MB innovations banned (“party mode”, DAS etc)
> because they couldn’t match them or hadn’t thought of them.

And therein lies the solution to the problem. Resurrect a previously
banned tech which should never have been banned in the first place
and repurpose it. Turn the bathtub and driver into an inertial mass
damper!

I thought of the idea whilst watching this race in the pub, so it might
be a terrible idea, but steadycams work, and Taipai 101 hasn't fallen
over yet despite a 7.1 and plenty of high 6s, so IMDs definitely have
utility.

Phil
--
We are no longer hunters and nomads. No longer awed and frightened, as we have
gained some understanding of the world in which we live. As such, we can cast
aside childish remnants from the dawn of our civilization.
-- NotSanguine on SoylentNews, after Eugen Weber in /The Western Tradition/

On 2022-06-17 08:10, Sir Tim wrote:
> Matt Larkin <matthew.larkin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> surely all this will do is hamper teams like Merc further compared to teams like
>> RBR which appear to have less of the same issue.
>>
> Indeed, but that is as it should be. Mercedes seem to have designed a car
> that is only competitive when it is bashing the living daylights out of its
> drivers. It is right that the regulator, i.e. the FIA, should introduce
> measures to protect the drivers when the teams, in the interests of
> competitiveness, might be reluctant to do so. As I understand it the
> problem is quite easy to alleviate (presumably by raising the ride height
> or similar measures) but it would be grossly unfair to teams that have got
> it right to introduce mandatory changes that would disadvantage them.
>
> Having said that, it is slightly irritating that, in the past, RBR have
> succeeded in getting various MB innovations banned (“party mode”, DAS etc)
> because they couldn’t match them or hadn’t thought of them.

One of the things I really hate about modern F1 are all the times the
FIA bans things that were clearly legal at the time the teams devised
them; especially when they stretch the definition of something
("affecting the aerodynamic performance of the car" is a very common
refrain in this).

This blunts their edge when they actually really do need to consider a
change in regulations such as the one facing them right now.

The driver's health and safety are both truly at risk if the car is
hammering up and down too hard.

Just how hard that is... ...I'm not qualified to say, but just like
other sports that have woken up to the dangers of head impacts (North
American football, hockey), there quite clearly IS a "too hard".

And yes: every team out there knew that there was going to be a certain
amount of porpoising that they weren't going to be able to accurately
model in CFD or test in their wind tunnels...

....and if some teams can't get their porpoising under control to meet a
change in the regulations... ...well that's just too bad for them.

Sir Tim wrote:

> Matt Larkin <matthew.larkin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > surely all this will do is hamper teams like Merc further compared
> > to teams like RBR which appear to have less of the same issue.
> >
> Indeed, but that is as it should be. Mercedes seem to have designed a
> car that is only competitive when it is bashing the living daylights
> out of its drivers. It is right that the regulator, i.e. the FIA,
> should introduce measures to protect the drivers when the teams, in
> the interests of competitiveness, might be reluctant to do so. As I
> understand it the problem is quite easy to alleviate (presumably by
> raising the ride height or similar measures) but it would be grossly
> unfair to teams that have got it right to introduce mandatory changes
> that would disadvantage them.
>
> Having said that, it is slightly irritating that, in the past, RBR
> have succeeded in getting various MB innovations banned (“party
> mode”, DAS etc) because they couldn’t match them or hadn’t thought of
> them.

+1

--
Bozo Bin
Alan Baker
Texasgate

On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 1:23:23 PM UTC-6, Bigbird wrote:

> +1

fuck off