The system must be more dynamic than that. If it was just an extremely slow rebound then it would hurt them through a series of bends. If it is as simple as you're saying then, yes, I'm sure there's nothing illegal about it so there will be no problems come the season start.zac510 wrote:So in a sense it could just be interpreted as extremely slow rebound damping and people probably wouldn't consider adjusting the rebound damping to be illegal.
Definitely goes to show how integrate vehicle dynamics are. There's not just simply one thing that does one job. They are all influencing another, all the time.
Edit: Ok it seems to me like if they were affected they would say the opposite anyway despite a couple of teams already knowing the full story.lio007 wrote:Ok, that's interesting:
I'm not sure about this.bonjon1979 wrote:.... “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....
RedNEO wrote:Edit: Ok it seems to me like if they were affected they would say the opposite anyway despite a couple of teams already knowing the full story.lio007 wrote:Ok, that's interesting:
godlameroso wrote:I guess then that means suspension can be as complex as you like as long as it's not externally powered to adjust ride height. In other words active suspension isn't prohibited as long as it functions by purely passive and mechanical means.
You are deluding yourself if you believe that suspension has not been tuned for aero benefit for a long time.tom101 wrote:if has aero benefits, it's illegal, and it's obvious
the question is, who will be the cheater master next year?
Was the changed setting from red to green decreased rebound damping?DaveW wrote:I'm not sure about this.bonjon1979 wrote:.... “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....
It is possible to alter the vehicle ride height without requiring the displacement of the device to oppose the applied load, and without explicitly storing energy.
Here is an (extreme) example. Two runs, shown in red & green, taken from a sinusoidal input test. Each has been processed to show minimum, maximum and average values of the time history of the front damper position. The plots were obtained from one rig test of a mid-engined GP vehicle, using the same input, the same vehicle, the same ballast, the same springs. The only difference was damper settings.... There is a 9 mm difference in average damper position of the two runs at 14 seconds.
I see your point now about why you would want some compression damping.DaveW wrote:Yes, and increased compression damping.godlameroso wrote:...Was the changed setting from red to green decreased rebound damping?
Excess rebound can only cause a car to jack down as the shock doesn't allow the spring to come back to resting height fast enough before the next bump that further compresses the suspension which eventually causes the car to ride the bump rubber or packer or whatever.roon wrote:Regarding the tendency of a damper to cause a spring to remain compressed or extended during a long period of excitation, say 10 seconds or more (if I'm interpreting this discussion correctly): is it a matter of creating an asymmetry between rebound and compression rates? If so, what's the relationship?
Less compression & more rebound = ?
More compression & less rebound = ?
Users browsing this forum: CCBot [Bot], edxferrari and 3 guests