F1 active suspension

[xpensive]

I can sense a lack of imagination here, what if you allowed active aerodynamics to be controlled by lateral accelleration?

[Scotracer]

I can sense a lack of imagination here, what if you allowed active aerodynamics to be controlled by lateral accelleration?

GPS so that the wings are ready before the corner, not after the corner has begun

[xpensive]

Ok, so we let the aerodynamics be controlled by accelleration in every direction, how about that?
Oh mama...

[Giblet]

Cost is the issue.

The cost.

Who has the best active ride wins regardless of driver, again just like a decade prior.

[toto1041]

The connection between motorsport and road-cars ended a while back.

Motorsport should now never be seen as a form to improve technology for roadcars IMO.

A road car and racing car these days are simply too different.

Gizmos? Nah. The FIA made the right decisions to ban TC, LC and active suspension.

I fully agree with Scott, the initial proposals Mosley suggested came from nowhere it seemed! The logistical challenge of reducing that much cost in so short time is too difficult for anyone. That and of course the huge job losses that could occur when currently un-employment is at a very low rate!

i come to the same conclusion now as well. all f1 has to worry about is that their cars are the fastest in the world around a circuit and the drivers are the finest available. if they lose that then it becomes an empty shell of a trademark.

[jddh1]

i come to the same conclusion now as well. all f1 has to worry about is that their cars are the fastest in the world around a circuit and the drivers are the finest available. if they lose that then it becomes an empty shell of a trademark.

I doubt it will come down to that. What else is out there that's more advanced? Surely not NASCAR as these guys are restricting everything, worse than Max.
WRC? They're in worse shape than F1 because of Max. It's not a big deal I guess because they're not the cash cow that F1 is. Same for WTCC.

[Jersey Tom]

You'd be very surprised at the level of engineering and development in NASCAR...

[xpensive]

Cost is the issue.

The cost.

Who has the best active ride wins regardless of driver, again just like a decade prior.

The cost of developing the gizmos of the nineties was like zip in comparion with KERS. Active aerodynamics would bring some technical xcitement back to F1 at a relatively small cost, as well as reducing fuel-consumption, making F1 greener.

[jddh1]

You'd be very surprised at the level of engineering and development in NASCAR...

Oh, I believe that. It's just that France and his homies have "frozen" pretty much everything. And I know that these guys have to be extremely creative to develop things and yet stay within the regulations.

[Giblet]

Cost is the issue.

The cost.

Who has the best active ride wins regardless of driver, again just like a decade prior.

The cost of developing the gizmos of the nineties was like zip in comparion with KERS. Active aerodynamics would bring some technical xcitement back to F1 at a relatively small cost, as well as reducing fuel-consumption, making F1 greener.

Sorry I thought we were talking about active suspension, the topic of the post? I didn't realize the tangent had already been set into motion.

Active aero I am all for, it would be way less expensive than a modern active suspension, considering how important modern weight distribution is.

[riff_raff]

Giblet,

Active suspension on F1 cars was, in effect, active aero. The main benefit of active suspension on an F1 chassis was that it virtually eliminated changes in pitch, roll and ride height. So the aero downforce and traction balance produced by the underbody was always perfectly consistent and predictable. Whether the car was accelerating, braking, cornering, or going straight at high/low speeds. In a straight line, the ride height and pitch (and thus downforce) could even be adjusted to reduce drag and allow higher straightaway speeds.

Most suspension design and tuning on an aero chassis with conventional suspension, like an F1 car, focuses on optimizing the performance of the underbody aerodynamics during cornering, braking, etc. Things like weight transfer and mechanical grip are usually secondary issues, since the underbody is so effective at producing downforce.

Purely active aero devices on an F1 car would be a huge engineering effort. The sheer number of actuators required for all of the wing elements, undertray, and spoilers would be huge, expensive, and would require a very complex controller, instrumentation and software system.

But having said that, the active suspension systems used in F1 before they were banned, gave truly impressive performance.

Regards,
Terry

[ISLAMATRON]

The reason I hated is that he wanted it done so abruptly. If you go back and read my posts I called for a gradual reduce of the budget over the next 3-4 years. I was thinking of all the people that work for these teams. They have to go somewhere and it's easier to find them a place in the company given some time than forced to let them go jobless.
So yes, I agree to the concept of a budget cap, but slowly ease into it, and not 44 mill Euros but 100 million. That's a more reasonable budget for F1 I think. And that would include what Max tried to leave out - the hospitality, entertainment and all that fun stuff.

Because what Max proposed was the usual bullshit he comes out with. He wanted:

-Two tier racing
-Almost immediate change from £400M/season to £40M/season

What he proposed just wasn't feasible. If he actually had a plan it would work.

I know this thread is about active suspension, but I feel obliged to respond to your posts with actual words from FOTA themselves for their own cost cutting plans for 2010 & 2011

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/n ... 4328.shtml

Auto Motor und Sport also said team expenditure, excluding driver and upper management pay and marketing, will not exceed 100m euros in 2010, and 50m in 2011.

Factory-based staff is to be capped at 350 personnel per team in 2010, decreasing to 280 in 2011, with more staff per team allowed if less money is spent on buying components from external suppliers.

So how is it now that they can find a way to cut expenditures to 100M Euro(including the drivers & engines and Hospitality) but they could not do so under Max's proposed budget cap?(which would have allowed for a bigger budget) The two tiers were only an option left open for teams who refused to operate under the budget cap.

So now we get the FOTA plan with the same money levels, with no testing, limited personnel, and only limited body work changes.

FOTA =FAIL

[xpensive]

I beg to differ Terry, I think the cost of a dozen electrical actuators for active aerodynamics would be next to nothing, when compared to the prize of just one of those throw-away batteries used for KERS. While saving a whole lot more fuel and giving some technical xcitement back to this ever more regulated and boring Formula.

Tell you the truth, I doubt if a modern version of active suspension would be that xpensive either, a four-piston hydraulic servo-system governed by a computer through four LVDT's and a couple of accellerometers?

[The_Man]

I beg to differ Terry, I think the cost of a dozen electrical actuators for active aerodynamics would be next to nothing, when compared to the prize of just one of those throw-away batteries used for KERS. While saving a whole lot more fuel and giving some technical xcitement back to this ever more regulated and boring Formula.

Tell you the truth, I doubt if a modern version of active suspension would be that xpensive either, a four-piston hydraulic servo-system governed by a computer through four LVDT's and a couple of accellerometers?

The cost is not the cost of these components (high quality versions would be quite expensive), but the development costs in implementation of these technologies. Formula One will not take a stock system from somewhere and put it onto their cars they'll optimize it to the very last screw. The cars will be on 7post rigs for ages and spend a ton on analysis of the data.

[xpensive]

Xactly what F1 should be all about Man, not MrM's glorified version of GP2, bring on the gizmos. The more advanced the less you have to pay the driver, remember in 1993, when Senna offered to drive the Williams for free, now Alonso wants 50 MUSD a year?