Farnborough wrote: ↑08 Mar 2024, 11:10
Andres125sx wrote: ↑08 Mar 2024, 08:56
Stu wrote: ↑07 Mar 2024, 09:40
A Toyota Corolla will tend to use active suspension to improve the ride quality for the occupants without the usual negative performance connotations of a passive system that is ‘good’ for ride quality.
An F1 car will only use active suspension to improve car performance with no consideration of the effect on the occupant.
The only time since the discovery of the power of GE in F1 that a driver’s comfort has been considered is with the Lotus 88, and that got banned…
Exactly, same as a F1 car should tend to use active suspension to improve perfomance without the usual negative comfort connotations of passive system that are good for perfomance
Passive systems need to be extremelly stiff to keep ride height and rake/pitch as constant as possible to not reduce ground effects with those variations. That means confort is non-existant, F1 cars run almost with no suspension at all.
Active suspensions would allow keeping ride height constant, but still usefull suspension wich damps the bumps and do not torture drivers
Theres no "magic" in active suspension. Given a low movement to keep chassis consistent height from track surface, then tbe forces are effectively the same for the same car/load concept. It's just a control of tbe total kinematics restricted to the same range in millimetres.
To make compliance in suspension, that reduces peak load into sprung mass, will always require more travel, howsoever that travel is then controlled. Loosely, for bumps of any particular size, you need travel to match. WRC cars being a good working example.
The core problem is making a design that benefits running so close to track, where does anyone think a team will want to run it ?
The aero design would have to change, but they'll maximise anything like this because that's always the focus. Or reduce the plank wear tolerance and enforce exclusion to make decent use of it. Then they'd make sure they can get to the end of the race without impingement of that dimension, as they did after all the moaning from Cota.
You´re missing 2 important factors of active suspension. First, you can control when the suspension will move, and when it will be rigid. If the movement is causing a pitch or tilt movment of the chasis, it will be stiff, no movement, constant ride height, constant rake, constant tilt. If the movement is not causing an angle movement, then it will be soft and absorb the bump. Contrary to any passive system wich is always soft or hard, but can´t be soft for some conditions, and hard for some others like active suspension do
Second, active suspensions can control and change on the fly ride height, so now that cars are bottoming at the end of the straight, that´s because it´s a passive system wich is hugely loaded by the maximum DF a F1 car creates at max speed, so suspensions are compressed, the plank is bottoming, and there´s no more suspension travel to aborb bumps. But contrary to this drawback of passive systems, active suspension can raise the car at straights. That will reduce drag, but also increase travel, so it can absorb bumps perfectly.
