Red Bull RB6

[myurr]

This has to be a 'default' ride height.
Which means the ride height is either adjustable by the driver or 'active'.
Regs?

Whether the photo was from after the race or after quali then the car was light at that point, so it will be at its highest ride height. As fuel is put into the car it will get lower - the unladen ride height will thus have to be high to prevent the car bottoming out at the beginning of the race.

So there's nothing active or driver adjustable based on this photo - not to say it's not there, there's just nothing in the photo suggesting that it is.

[autogyro]

This has to be a 'default' ride height.
Which means the ride height is either adjustable by the driver or 'active'.
Regs?

Whether the photo was from after the race or after quali then the car was light at that point, so it will be at its highest ride height. As fuel is put into the car it will get lower - the unladen ride height will thus have to be high to prevent the car bottoming out at the beginning of the race.

So there's nothing active or driver adjustable based on this photo - not to say it's not there, there's just nothing in the photo suggesting that it is.

Oh yes there is. Images of the car on track show a very low ride height in all configerations. They also show a big gap between the floor and the tyre when the car is very low. This was the case when the car went over the finish line on TV. The photo above is in parc ferme just after the race.
The height shown is way way to high for generating any meaningful DF and yet we know (even from Hamilton) that the RB6 has up to twice the DF of other cars, at least last year. The picture above also shows that the floor has scrapped the tyre and a mark has been left where the gravel is obviously in contact with the floor. The picture does not show the car in either a full fuel or near empty fuel ride height condition, it is a default 'high' position.
Either the ride height is driver adjusted or active. I also believe that the spring rate is much softer over all than the others because it can be thanks to the ride height system. Soft springs give a much wider range of pre adjusted ride height.

[AbbaleRacing77]

I think that the only factor influencing the ride height during the race is downforce and not fuel load. I'm going to assume that the teams are all using a Zero Droop setup like used in many of my formula cars over the years.

For those of you unfamiliar with Zero droop it is when you crank preload into the springs so that the shocks are fully extended when being setup with a full tank. You then adjust the ride height using the spacers in the upright.

Because of this the shock always returns to the fully unloaded position even as the car gets lighter and cannot go any higher in height. The only forces that change the ride height are downforce and g loading.

Please correct me if im wrong

[Lurk]

I think that the only factor influencing the ride height during the race is downforce and not fuel load.

You need 2Tons of downforce to lower 1cm a F1, so a loss of 200kg should raise the car only 1mm... (But 1mm could be crucial for aerodynamic !)

[autogyro]

I think that the only factor influencing the ride height during the race is downforce and not fuel load. I'm going to assume that the teams are all using a Zero Droop setup like used in many of my formula cars over the years.

For those of you unfamiliar with Zero droop it is when you crank preload into the springs so that the shocks are fully extended when being setup with a full tank. You then adjust the ride height using the spacers in the upright.

Because of this the shock always returns to the fully unloaded position even as the car gets lighter and cannot go any higher in height. The only forces that change the ride height are downforce and g loading.

Please correct me if im wrong

So you never bothered much with droop valving in the shock absorbers then. Now that would make the car bounce over the kerbs would it not?
Now where have I just seen this happening?
Of course DF and g effect ride height but from the set level given by vehicle weight. With the high fuel loads this year there are only two ways to get this controlled within the narrow essential base line. One is to have stiffer springs, the other is to be Adrian Newey with the RB6.

[autogyro]

I think that the only factor influencing the ride height during the race is downforce and not fuel load.

You need 2Tons of downforce to lower 1cm a F1, so a loss of 200kg should raise the car only 1mm... (But 1mm could be crucial for aerodynamic !)

So you are saying that from stationary with no DF to maximum DF speed the car goes down 1cm and when the fuel is gone it goes up 1mm.
I dont think so. Such uncontrolled ride height differences would make the car undriveable.
So what keeps the level near constant? Stiff springs (not just zero droop s/abs' which is bad enough) and this year the extra fuel weight change means even stiffer springs.
End result oversteer that cannot be adjusted out ie Merc.
Am I correct in thinking that Brawn had similar problems late last year but not so bad as this year? Perhaps early last year DF levels started lower and the Brawn problems only started when DF increased at about the same time as Newey sorted the RBs ride height system?

[AbbaleRacing77]

No it wouldn't necessarily cause it to bounce over the curbs if your high speed compression and rebound settings are setup correctly. Having droop in the car only effects the car in parts of the track where the pavement drops away which isn't a big problem on formula tracks because they are very smooth. Zero droop will also allow you to use a number of different spring rates while maintaining consistent ride height as fuel burns off.

Does anyone know what type of differentials they used back when they used ride height adjusters in the pits?

[autogyro]

No it wouldn't necessarily cause it to bounce over the curbs if your high speed compression and rebound settings are setup correctly. Having droop in the car only effects the car in parts of the track where the pavement drops away which isn't a big problem on formula tracks because they are very smooth. Zero droop will also allow you to use a number of different spring rates while maintaining consistent ride height as fuel burns off.

Does anyone know what type of differentials they used back when they used ride height adjusters in the pits?

Using shock absorbers at the end of their travel as a kind of bump stop, because mechanical set up and handling has to be compromised almost completely to allow the god of downforce to dominate, shows just how narrow focused and out of date F1 and aero formula racing in general has become.
It has effectively become a source of jobs for aero students with degrees with little experience of proper motor racing and egos based on 'tunnel' vision.
If I do say so my self I enjoyed that.

[PlatinumZealot]

I was just about to say that too! That Idea sounds like a bump stop to me basically.

[marcush.]

I think that the only factor influencing the ride height during the race is downforce and not fuel load.

You need 2Tons of downforce to lower 1cm a F1, so a loss of 200kg should raise the car only 1mm... (But 1mm could be crucial for aerodynamic !)

the picture with the high rideheight in parc ferme is evidence that they have considerable droop!
how else would you achieve a bigger ride height in parc ferme if there was a mechanical stop for the suspension (droop limiter)...
if they had zero droop AND a high rideheight in parc ferme after running low in the race..there must be a means of changing rideheight between flag and parc ferme..simple as that .
so autogyro has apoint in insisting there is a adjustment be it active or passive
the change has to be triggered somehow.
active is obviously not allowed so either there is a means of lever or release on the outside of the car ,or it is influenced by a passive system inside the car .

[ringo]

I think it's ratcheted, with a spring pre-load. To prevent the ratchet from reducing the ride height for instances when the load decrease, like when the inside wheel unloads, both bell cranks are tied in from left to right. The height only ratchets down when the load decreases evenly left to right, which is the decrease due to fuel burn. I guess a diagram is needed to make the idea a little clearer.

[AbbaleRacing77]

I think that the only factor influencing the ride height during the race is downforce and not fuel load.

You need 2Tons of downforce to lower 1cm a F1, so a loss of 200kg should raise the car only 1mm... (But 1mm could be crucial for aerodynamic !)

the picture with the high rideheight in parc ferme is evidence that they have considerable droop!
how else would you achieve a bigger ride height in parc ferme if there was a mechanical stop for the suspension (droop limiter)...
if they had zero droop AND a high rideheight in parc ferme after running low in the race..there must be a means of changing rideheight between flag and parc ferme..simple as that .
so autogyro has apoint in insisting there is a adjustment be it active or passive
the change has to be triggered somehow.
active is obviously not allowed so either there is a means of lever or release on the outside of the car ,or it is influenced by a passive system inside the car .

How do you consider a terrible picture of the car in parc ferme accurate evidence?

Which picture are you looking at exactly?

The front of a formula car is almost always setup with zero droop BUT they do use some droop in the rear of formula cars in order to keep the car from spinning the tires in bumpy sections, but it only ranges from 2mm-9mm depending on the track. Are you saying that you can see a change of 2-9mm from a picture well enough to draw conclusions?

Even if they're running the max 9mm of droop without any other system of maintaining ride height, the maximum change of the ride height over the course of a race would be 9mm. Maximum

These are not stock cars. They only use maybe 2 inches of travel MAX.

Watch this video of the mercedes at 40 seconds into the video

http://formula-one.speedtv.com/article/ ... e-mgp-w01/

[Lurk]

I think that the only factor influencing the ride height during the race is downforce and not fuel load.

You need 2Tons of downforce to lower 1cm a F1, so a loss of 200kg should raise the car only 1mm... (But 1mm could be crucial for aerodynamic !)

So you are saying that from stationary with no DF to maximum DF speed the car goes down 1cm and when the fuel is gone it goes up 1mm.
I dont think so. Such uncontrolled ride height differences would make the car undriveable.

Some F1 are hitting the floor with their plank on bumpy tracks and there is no problem. So a smooth variation of 1cm will not make a car undriveable...


I'm not sur the car is so high compared to its "normal" configuration.


On this pic, rear is already high and the car is onload.
And on the parc fermé pic, floor is not touching the tyre anymore. There is clearly a gap between the tyre and the floor:

[marcush.]

wow ...that video section is plain awesome..

just look at the massive rideheight changes at the tip of the splitter ...it is everything between zero and over 1 inch ..
and the completely unloaded inside tyre....massive roll ..not only from the tyres..
would be nice to see the RB in comparison thru this corner.

of course the springs are progressive to the extremes .they need the third spring

just to keep it from scraping at high speeds no question .but at lower speeds without much downforce they need and want compliance to have grip .and only about this slow to medium speed area will be influenced by the static rideheight change .
I´m talking about 4 mm of static ride height and this has influence mainly in the low downforce part of the aeromap ..

we don´t know when this picture was taken ..it has to be after some running ,the stones and debris are tetimony to this and you don´t do that just to wind up the mechanics...thats for sure ..but at the end of the race to be sure not to be bumped out because of underweight.. the ride height is extreme ..good or bad picture ..

[autogyro]

Your curved line is drawn on the front face of the tyre and means nothing.
The picture is not terrible, it shows the floor close enough to the tyre to scrape off gravel and shows the mark to prove it.
The height of the floor above the lower curve of the tyre is obvious and very high.
The picture you show with the RB6 crnering shows the inside rear floor height where the car is at maximum role and the inside suspension extended lifting the inside of the car and floor. This picture also means nothing.