F1 2010: Ride height adjustments during pit stops

[WhiteBlue]

We already have a thread for this issue!

viewtopic.php?p=157709#p157709

[marcush.]

McLaren suspects adjustable ride-height on Red Bull
ESPNF1 Staff
March 27, 2010

Red Bull could be gaining a controversial advantage in qualifying

McLaren's Martin Whitmarsh has suggested Red Bull's car might be hiding a controversial driver-adjustable ride-height system, after the two RB6s dominated qualifying in Melbourne.

The difference between a car laden with fuel for the start of the race and one running on fumes in qualifying is so great that the weight of the petrol physically alters the height of the car. This means most teams have to run the car relatively high in qualifying, at a disadvantage, in order to compensate for the weight of the full tank needed to start the race. But during qualifying on Saturday, on-board footage from Mark Webber's Red Bull appeared to show the car occasionally bottoming-out.

McLaren boss Whitmarsh told the BBC after the session that, following a similar situation in Bahrain, he wondered why the Red Bulls were not "dragging their arses on full tanks" in the race. He said it is "evidence of ride-height control systems" being in use, "which many people wouldn't have thought were permissible".

In the wake of last year's diffuser row, and the McLaren F-duct saga in Bahrain, F1 could now be set for its next technical controversy. Whitmarsh said McLaren is now "working quite hard" on implementing a Red Bull-like ride-height system, and "hopefully by China we'll have something on the car".

Good morning Macca.

haha ...isn´t it funny when Macs are reading F1tech and sack employees for posting random stuff ,but missing the boat completely with tech stuff we were discussing at that very time...I can´t get over this...

[lebesset]

missed that one wb ...how interesting that someone foresaw events !

[Professor]

Here is some information about the road car system mentioned above by Bill Shoe:

http://www.formula1journal.com/

[autogyro]

Here is some information about the road car system mentioned above by Bill Shoe:

http://www.formula1journal.com/

It goes much further back than that.
I was using such systems on my racing Mini in the 1970,s, it was called hydromatic or hydragas suspension and was fitted to the mini, the 1100/1300 the Maxi, the Metro and the 1800. It was self levelling and had to be pressurised with an antifreeze solution. On these cars rubber bump stops did the rest and not springs.
There could well be a system in the RB6 that does this and allows for the conventional springing that remains to be softer than the other cars.
Should be a fairly simple design to achieve.
The problem is any major geometry changes needed to catch up.
The RB6 definitely has steeper angled and longer push rods on the front and a softer more controlled suspension.

[DaveW]

Manipulating the running average ride height of a race vehicle does not require Nivomat dampers, pre-load adjusters, or anything "trick" or remotely illegal, as any engineer working in a race series imposing a minimum static ride height will tell you.

Where are the NASCAR or hill climber posters?

[Ciro Pabón]

We already have a thread for this issue!

viewtopic.php?p=157709#p157709

I merged both threads. Thanks.

[autogyro]

Manipulating the running average ride height of a race vehicle does not require Nivomat dampers, pre-load adjusters, or anything "trick" or remotely illegal, as any engineer working in a race series imposing a minimum static ride height will tell you.

Where are the NASCAR or hill climber posters?

A minimum 'static' ride height is not the same as the ride height variation between fully heavy and fully light if any fine control is to result.
Setting zero droop on shock absorbers can be used it is true but all this does is compromise the spring rate and the range of set up.
This matters little on a defined hill climb, driving uphill keeps the shocks under the droop stop position and NASCAR has a far less delicate aero requirement and much heavier cars.

[bill shoe]

Here is some information about the road car system mentioned above by Bill Shoe:

http://www.formula1journal.com/

The link above gives an excellent detailed description of the Nivomat damper.

I was very skeptical when people on this forum started speculating about the McLaren snorkel-wing-stalling-thingie. Well, turns out I was wrong on that. However, now it feels great to be right about the adjustable ride-height issue.

Woo Hoo !!!

I am definitely in the ballpark on this and quite likely exactly correct. May I claim to be the first person who put in writing (~Feb 15) that this was the correct way to control ride height in F1 in 2010 (outside of the Red Bull engineering dept.)?

While I'm on the subject, I also gave a detailed explaination of why this type of system is legal. McLaren, Brawn, et al may want to refer to my Feb 17 post that responds to Speedsense.

Regarding NASCAR and other series where there has traditionally been manipulation around minimum (static) ride height rules: It's my understanding that most of that manipulation, at least at tracks like Daytona, simply consisted of having one-way shocks that slammed the car down until it had no functioning suspension left. This was an appropriate trick for those tracks, but the key to the Nivomat/Red Bull system is that it controls ride height while allowing normal suspension springing and damping.

F1 teams could do worse than to keep up with this website!!

[autogyro]

Hi Bill, I wonder if you can confirm if the web site and the suspension described on it, pre dates the Leyland hydragas system that I used to sell and race with when I had an official Leyland Special Tuning center in Watford UK in the early 1970s?
I have a Leyland ST manual in front of me with the system described dated 1976.
The notes even describe the system as self levelling and there were three options red band green band and blue band, giving different presures.
Of course Leyland is long gone, so I am wondering if this is yet another American site running just a little bit late!

[autogyro]

Oh by the way Bill, I also helped Lotus when they were playing with these systems on F1 cars. It was to be a development of the Lotus 88, perhaps you can web search the technology.
So no I do not think you were first applying the idea to F1, we beat you by around 30 years.
Sorry mate.

[DaveW]

Regarding NASCAR and other series where there has traditionally been manipulation around minimum (static) ride height rules: It's my understanding that most of that manipulation, at least at tracks like Daytona, simply consisted of having one-way shocks that slammed the car down until it had no functioning suspension left.

Apologies, Bill, but ride height manipulation in series like NASCAR is a little more sophisticated than your explanation would suggest - which, by the way, wouldn't work even on the Daytona oval (think about lateral balance). Something similar could easily be used by F1 teams to control the variation in ride height with fuel burn. To put the problem into context, you might like to consider the ratio of fuel weight to down force at terminal airspeed (which the suspension also has to cope with).

[BreezyRacer]

How can you possibly make a passive system that raises as weight is added (fuel in this case)??????

I'm anxiously awaiting this piece of magic ..

BTW here's a pic of Alonso in Q3 and note his ride height on fumes. The strakes on the rear diffuser are almost dragging and the front splitter is maybe 15 mm off the pavement. Is anyone climbing all over the Ferraris for adjustable ride height?

[autogyro]

How can you possibly make a passive system that raises as weight is added (fuel in this case)??????

I'm anxiously awaiting this piece of magic ..

Lets put it this way breezy and I am sorry it has no aero at all.
The racing saloon I had with hydragas suspension had to be pumped up with an anti freeze fluid, I think it was over 500psi but dont quote me. When static and pumped up it sat at the very top of the available suspension movement. It only set itself to the ride height needed when the vehicle moved and the suspension was operated. This hydragas system maintained a set ride height over a narrow range and it was the rubber bump stops that dealt with heavier suspension needs. Simply change those bump stops for springs and you have the basis of a F1 ride levelling suspension that keeps the ride height the same no matter what the weight changes (or aero inputs) are.
Lotus looked into it in depth during the skirts and dual chassis development.
FIA banned them, so the development stopped. I would guess that RB has picked it up again. Could be a variation of this or perhaps it is totaly different we shall see.

[BreezyRacer]

Here's a rundown from the Jame Allen website ..
"Ride height adjusters
A lot of talk in the paddocks of both Bahrain and Melbourne has centred on ride height adjusters on the Red Bull and Ferrari cars in particular, which means that they can optimise the aerodynamics in qualifying and for most of the race.

Up to a point, the lower you can run your car the more downforce it will have. But this year with refuelling banned, teams need to set the ride height so it works for a low fuel qualifying lap and then without changing it in parc ferme before the race, also works when the car has 160 kilos of fuel in it. Inevitably the extra weight will lower the car on its suspension and mean you will be running 3mm lower in the first stint of the race than in qualifying. As the fuel burns off the car rises. If you can lower the car a few millimetres at your first pit stop, you will have more downforce for the rest of the race.

It is perfectly legal as long as the car is stationary when the change is made and the gain is worth a few seconds over a race distance. Here’s how it’s calculated; every 1 mm of ride height you move is worth 5 kilos of downforce, which in turn is worth 0.05 seconds per lap. So if you pit on lap 18 in Melbourne, you can lower the car will have 40 laps of benefit, which is worth two seconds. If you lower the car by 4mm, which is realistic, you will gain 8 seconds. It is only worth it if you can make the change easily in the pit stop without losing that time.

Ferrari’s system is manual and very obvious. There have been suggestions that Red Bull has a more sophisticated system, which allows the car to run low in qualifying trim but then raises itself up when the 160 kilos of fuel are loaded in and lowers itself again as the fuel burns off. The key to that is making it legal.

Other teams are scratching their heads about how Red Bull might have achieved that, but one suggestion is that they may be exploiting the regulation that allows teams to re-gas pressurize the dampers between qualifying and the race. If this is the case then they would get the benefit of running the car low in qualifying and then raise it up when the fuel is added. Hence their stunning qualifying form."

I certainly see how increasing the gas charge in dampers raises the car. We used to do this in shock tuning on a regular basis .. I was not aware they could recharge shocks during parc ferme so this method makes sense, as does the manual adjustment during pit stops. I wonder how quickly they can pull this off. And I do remember one team .. was it Sauber? .. that "lst a ride height adjuster in a practice session in Bahrain.