F1 active suspension

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.

allow active suspension: yes or no

YES
46
49%
NO
47
51%
 
Total votes: 93

User avatar
djos
113
Joined: 19 May 2006, 06:09
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: F1 active suspension

Post

Jersey Tom wrote:I'm not sure active suspension would really be THAT expensive to develop, particularly after having seen the Williams setup. I think it might even be cheaper than KERS.

Mechanically in the grand scheme of things it's not that complicated. 4 hydraulic actuators, some accumulators, etc.

The control system behind it, is where its at.
Not to mention that Teams wouldn't have to throw away their AS system after each race weekend!
"In downforce we trust"

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: F1 active suspension

Post

Teriffic point you have there djos.

Anyway, as an engineer I would like to see F1 more energy-efficient, while maintaining speed as well as technology.
I believe that limiting engine-power and allowing for AS, active-aerodynamics and lower minimum weight would do just that.

KERS certainly did nothing to improve mileage.
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

Giblet
Giblet
5
Joined: 19 Mar 2007, 01:47
Location: Canada

Re: F1 active suspension

Post

Why doesn't anybody get that AS does absolutely nothing for the show and costs money teams don't have right now??

Right now, F1 needs consistency of regs, and marketing of some kind to fill empty grandstands. AS at this juncture will simply be another nail in F1's coffin. It could be argued that KERS and expensive crap like it drove BMW, one of the few constructors most people respected and/or liked, from the sport.

I don't know how many nails are left, but history has shown us why AS costs so much. It is just a few actuators and crap, sure, but it's a complete overhaul of packaging and weight and suspension. It adds so much complexity to the cars, you need to increase staff now to. Money money money money.

The FIA did the right thing in banning it so nobody had to spend mass amounts of money, that weren't in the budget, just to CATCH UP to everyone else.

It's not a cheap system, it needs to be developed with a suspension manufacturer/partner.

Nobody is talking about how this could be affordable?!?! You guys are acting like someone walking into a Ferrari showroom and pretending you can afford one when you kow you have no money. It's a nice fantasy, but seriously?

AS is such an utterly dominant tech, he has the best AS will win the championship.

How can that possibly be good for the sport, as opposed to wetting the whistles of techies like us?

"Not to mention that Teams wouldn't have to throw away their AS system after each race weekend!"

You mean are referring to the batteries in a KERS system right? Some teams chose the kind they could afford, others chose one that needs no battery and little maintenance. The Flywheel Capacitor from Flywheel needs no batteries, and just seals and bearing replacement occasionally.

Some teams like Mclaren choose to waste, doesn't make it right or how it has to be.
Before I do anything I ask myself “Would an idiot do that?” And if the answer is yes, I do not do that thing. - Dwight Schrute

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: F1 active suspension

Post

So far, everybody's using batteries for KERS, at an outrageous "consumable-cost" the way I understand?
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

Giblet
Giblet
5
Joined: 19 Mar 2007, 01:47
Location: Canada

Re: F1 active suspension

Post

Yes the cost is there, but KERS adds to the show. Fans can watch the race, see who has or doesn't have it, and see when it is being used. If KERS wasn't throttled to 80hp it would have had a different outcome. Flybrid needs no batteries, FIA screwed up the KERS implementation, but we all already know this, it's old news.

The AS will add nothing for the fans while adding cost, this is the key difference. Nobody has even addressed the issue of AS making the cars a whole hella lot faster, maybe even a little too fast for current tracks, especially since modern computing power and software will make it even more effective than when Williams utterly dominated with it.

Again, AS = money all the way from the top to bottom, while adding no entertainment value, and devaluing the drivers via the lesser amount of skill needed to drive the cars.

Drawing comparisons against other techs is pointless, as AS is a different animal performance wise.
Before I do anything I ask myself “Would an idiot do that?” And if the answer is yes, I do not do that thing. - Dwight Schrute

User avatar
flynfrog
Moderator
Joined: 23 Mar 2006, 22:31

Re: F1 active suspension

Post

Giblet wrote:You seem to think I want all tech things taken off of the cars. I think KERS is awesome, even in it's low end form.

TC was banned for reasons of more potential passing, it is not a good comparison, although I did mention it. TC is cheap.

Active ride will cost each and every team money just to reach parity. Once the goal of everyone in a flat riding car is done, there is no more room for any development in that tech. Only possibility is chasing tiny gains in weight reduction, increasing the cost in a disproportionate amount to what is being gained, every year.

Eventually more teams will leave, citing rising costs, and again, the sport will suffer. not to mention cornering speeds going out of control again, and the formula needing to be stifled so more drivers don't die. So everyone gets active ride, then what, we go back to grooved tires to slow them down? 2 litre v6? Redesign each and every single track's runoffs? I don't see the viability.

What possible argument can anyone have that adding active ride in the current F1 is either affordable or will help draw fans to the EMPTY grandstands, as these are the issues currently plaguing the sport scandals aside.

One last edited thing here : With all of Bernie's cashola, why can't the old frikking idiot understand that making the races HD will guarantee more viewership. he is incredibly stupid for someone so cunning.
Oh so technology you like is good for the sport I get it.

I found one race V8s reving over 22k much more interesting than KERS.
That and watching Jensson decorate the front stretch with his engine. :lol:

Every thing you are saying about AS I can say about KERS. Not to have this generate into a pissing match I will agree to disagree with you.

Scotracer
Scotracer
3
Joined: 22 Apr 2008, 17:09
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland, UK

Re: F1 active suspension

Post

xpensive wrote:So far, everybody's using batteries for KERS, at an outrageous "consumable-cost" the way I understand?
Because it's the only way that makes any sense. What I do wonder however is why no one is using Ultracapacitors - these things are excellent for rapid charge and discharge.
Powertrain Cooling Engineer

User avatar
djos
113
Joined: 19 May 2006, 06:09
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: F1 active suspension

Post

Scotracer wrote:
xpensive wrote:So far, everybody's using batteries for KERS, at an outrageous "consumable-cost" the way I understand?
Because it's the only way that makes any sense. What I do wonder however is why no one is using Ultracapacitors - these things are excellent for rapid charge and discharge.
Too heavy apparently.
"In downforce we trust"

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: F1 active suspension

Post

No, I'm not gonna turn this into another KERS-thread, but KERS is stratospheric costs at a very limited performance gain.
The energy recovered is limited by a number of things and 400 kJ is just a little more than one percent of the engine's net output over the same lap. A 6.6 sec 20k would give you the same thing performance-wise.

And another again, AS and Active aerodynamics would make F1 technically interesting again, it's been a while.
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

User avatar
djos
113
Joined: 19 May 2006, 06:09
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: F1 active suspension

Post

xpensive wrote:No, I'm not gonna turn this into another KERS-thread, but KERS is stratospheric costs at a very limited performance gain.
The energy recovered is limited by a number of things and 400 kJ is just a little more than one percent of the engine's net output over the same lap. A 6.6 sec 20k would give you the same thing performance-wise.

And another again, AS and Active aerodynamics would make F1 technically interesting again, it's been a while.
Exactly, AS is one more superb F1 developed technology that helped set F1 apart from all other series.
"In downforce we trust"

User avatar
Ciro Pabón
106
Joined: 11 May 2005, 00:31

Re: F1 active suspension

Post

What about the problem of interaction between active suspension and downforce? How would you cope with that?

Is the idea to get faster cars in curves? I would say that we're asking enough of the drivers already.

I don't know if the idea of an active element has been answered by active front wings.

However, I'm all in for anything that improves the less than optimal aerodynamic performance of F1 cars and that improves fuel efficiency, Le Mans style.

I would like to call the attention of the forum to the idea of the "non-active" racing cars we have today: they are somehow a call to nostalgia. In NASCAR races the idea is more evident. I quote:

"... By extension, no wonder stock-car racing — a fast, furious sport contended on a paved roadway with snarling, smelly machines operated by hand — is surging in popularity at the very time the computerized information revolution is transforming our society from top to bottom. Stock-car racing expresses the industrial age more than does any big sport in America."

It's not amazing to discover than, as said many times in this forum, the raw power of gasoline engines makes unpractical to have cars as advanced as (and I quote myself) "the cars we have in our own garages".

For cars as advanced as 2009 cars to race (and by that I don't only mean active suspension, but active steering, braking assistance, traction control, active aerodynamics, active light beams, accident avoidance, and even parking (pit) help) you need a mental revolution about the role of drivers in a car.

I can remember well when spark advance was considered driver help, for example (around 1920). Who would consider nowadays controlling spark timing by hand?

I (wildly) guess that this kind of car, with active suspension (and active everything) wouldn't need more than 300 HP to achieve the same performance of a racing car, be it stock or formula.

When will FIA be open minded to this kind of racing cars?

I guess it will happen when all current directives are dead and a new generation, familiar with electric cars or whatever the future has for us in storage become the rulers of the racing world.

You need a different driving approach if you want to extract every drop of a "computerized car": you have to understand car dynamics, as today, but you also have to understand how computers work. This is a way of racing we still do not understand very well. At least, I don't.

Perhaps toto can be so kind as to explain to the forum how he races in his car.

Does he really race when the car is "helping him"? (I know he can do it, I've tried it, but some people, Max Mosley included, belive you don't). What have you do to extract the last drop of performance from this kind of cars? (I know you have to get some idea of what the computer is doing, and that's an art, altough some people, Max Mosley included, belive it's not).
Ciro

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: F1 active suspension

Post

Ciro Pabón wrote:What about the problem of interaction between active suspension and downforce? How would you cope with that?

Is the idea to get faster cars in curves? I would say that we're asking enough of the drivers already.

I don't know if the idea of an active element has been answered by active front wings.

However, I'm all in for anything that improves the less than optimal aerodynamic performance of F1 cars and that improves fuel efficiency, Le Mans style.
Difficult to understand what you mean with "problem of interaction" Ciro, one of the general ideas with AS were of course to enhance aerodynamics, but there are other benefits as well related to mechanical grip.

The level of downforce/lateral grip can always be restricted in other ways, I for one would like to see a flat-bottom-rule, as long as there is car to measure.

No, today's twice-per-lap front wing adjustment by a few degrees is not xactly what I mean by active aerodynamics.

My general idea is to make the cars more engineerish and fuel-efficient, racing down the straight with 700+ hp and a Cv well over one makes very little sense, as does carrying ballast around.
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

Giblet
Giblet
5
Joined: 19 Mar 2007, 01:47
Location: Canada

Re: F1 active suspension

Post

Zanardi had a really bad crash when his AS system had a leak causing his car to bottom and hard into the wall. There were other issues aside of cost and performance. How would that keep from happening again?
Before I do anything I ask myself “Would an idiot do that?” And if the answer is yes, I do not do that thing. - Dwight Schrute

User avatar
flynfrog
Moderator
Joined: 23 Mar 2006, 22:31

Re: F1 active suspension

Post

Giblet wrote:Zanardi had a really bad crash when his AS system had a leak causing his car to bottom and hard into the wall. There were other issues aside of cost and performance. How would that keep from happening again?
Any number of safe guards revolving around a leak detection/min ride height sensor. Cut revs, dummy light, both. Massa got hit in the head from a spring from a standard suspension how do you plan to stop that.

You could leave the car in the trailer I guess.

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: F1 active suspension

Post

Alex Zanardi drove a Williams in 1999 I think, but wasn't AS long gone by then?
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"