F1technical.net

The K&C rigs themselves are expensive as hell, but use of them from a 3rd party company is relatively inexpensive. I know of at least 2 places in the US that do it. $8000-$20000 depending on how many days you want to spend.

Allows you to get real kinematic curves, compliance rates, measure force-based roll centers... good stuff to have.

Who does the tires in your series?

Belatti wrote:Dave, check my post from Tue May 05, 2009 1:34 pm

As I have said, al_kar got a point and right now Im on it.

Egg on my face, I stand corrected. My humble apologies. =D>

to be honest ,any stiffness problem in your suspension will create flex under load ,so the tyre will point in a different direction dynamically then you figuered out in your simulations ...this will all add up ,every joint ,wheel bearing ,hub ,Rim ..
and this does make a marked difference on tyre temps .
This is also the reason why a proper racecar is hard to get tyre temps in ,you really have to push.Put the slicks on your street car and presto the tyres will chunk in no time because they will point in all directions..
So considering the forces involved instatallation stiffness is high on your agenda in motorsport except for :your driver is a lunatic and is overdriving the car anyways ,so no difference the tyres are ruined in no time ,or you work with reluctant amateurs unable to really squeeze the car ,in this case the geometry give actually will help to bring up the temps and pruduce grip,confidence .. and lap time.

In addition to my previous post of a (nearly) camber neutral suspension, an item of interest. The Dax Camber Compensation suspension system.

Maybe a little off topic but this reminds me a bit of the 3 wheel bike/car cross over called the carver.

Sorr about video quality this is the best I could find

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KhABgoss0M[/youtube]

Carlos wrote:In addition to my previous post of a (nearly) camber neutral suspension, an item of interest. The Dax Camber Compensation suspension system.

That against demostrate a lack of understanding of tire physics though....as camber thrust in the right direction is beneficial to grip....

Additionally, keeping the tire vertical through a corner would actually be detrimental to even tire wear.

mike wrote: the oncamber/F400 only reacts if you turn the wheel of the car and not the during bumping. so depending on the steering wheel input/camber out put, you should have perfect setting for most of the corners on a track, depending on the input of the steering wheel from a particular driver and the camber you want for each corner

Jersey Tom wrote:Additionally, keeping the tire vertical through a corner would actually be detrimental to even tire wear.

thats exactly my point, only if u initiate camber will you get full benefit of variable camber. ie turn a car like cornering a bike

So, if the roll forces upon corner entry were to shorten the upper control arm, that would be beneficial, or not?

mike wrote:

mike wrote: the oncamber/F400 only reacts if you turn the wheel of the car and not the during bumping. so depending on the steering wheel input/camber out put, you should have perfect setting for most of the corners on a track, depending on the input of the steering wheel from a particular driver and the camber you want for each corner

Jersey Tom wrote:Additionally, keeping the tire vertical through a corner would actually be detrimental to even tire wear.

thats exactly my point, only if u initiate camber will you get full benefit of variable camber. ie turn a car like cornering a bike

What about the rear tires?

Jersey Tom wrote:
Who does the tires in your series?

In the TC2000 and Top Race V6 the tires are 285-645-18 from Pirelli... and I could get some data from them

In the TC the tires are from a local factory called NA. Imagine how null the QC is that when you measure the inflated tire perimeter you can have from 3 to 4 mm diference, hardness can be anything from tire to tire, and so on...
Tire Testing Data? Dream on...

It looks like Mercedes are trying this again with the DAS Steering system.

The media is reporting it as variable Toe-In but that doesn't really make sense, it appears to me to be Variable Camber under driver control via a telescoping steering column. I'm not sure there would be much to gain in terms of lap time, but driver controlled variable camber could deliver a benefit in tyre life.

For performance Variable Toe-In doesn't make sense because the precise setting would be subject to the turn radius.But for tyre life it could also be beneficial to reduce Toe-In in a straight line if the track itself was good enough.

Is it legal under the rules? To have variable camber operational you would need the ride height to be less than optimal at some parts of the track as I believe changing camber affects ride height.I thought Red Bull were penalised for having variable ride height a few years back via smart suspension geometry and composites.

It's pretty obvious it's variable toe as it's pulling on the steering arms. It's not permitted to alter the other suspension arms or camber settings, etc.

PhillipM wrote: ↑

22 Feb 2020, 19:40

It's pretty obvious it's variable toe as it's pulling on the steering arms. It's not permitted to alter the other suspension arms or camber settings, etc.

I appreciate just watching the video showing the steering column movement it seems that Toe-In is the natural adjustment, but that is a big assumption about the relationship between the column and normal suspension geometry.

But it seems not normal, he pulls the column back in the straight, a simple relationship would mean the driver is creating Toe-In on the straight which increases rolling resistance and tyre wear. So I doubt there is a direct relationship between the movement of the steering column and the geometry it is adjusting. There are many possibilities that could alter an axis, not just Toe-In.

Which axis adjustment delivers the greatest differential benefit between the straight and cornering?

Toe-In is usually only to aid tracking stability, so while most commentary has been around changing geometry to static for the straight that defeats the purpose of Toe-In. Doesn't Toe-In increase rolling resistance?

Is it legal to alter any such settings after Park Ferme?

No, the cars have toe-out to start with, the steering movement on the straight removes most of that.