2017 Formula 1 suspension designs

[DaveW]

We are talking about 23 years ago. Even if it had more processing power, they carried around 20+ kg of computing hardware around just for the suspension. A Raspberry weights 31 grams.

The processor used on the Lotus T99 was a TMS320C25. To can look up its statistics, but it was a single chip processor weighing around 6.5 grams.

It is true that the original T99 active system weighed rather more than 20Kg, but that included a complete hydraulic system (pump, pressure control , reservoir, accumulators and pipes), an electronic control system (power supplies, a signal conditioning system, a data system, transducers and associated cabling). The hydraulic system and data system already exists today, and a modern CAN system would help (I recall the cabling of the T99 weighed around 5 Kg), so a guess the added weight of an active system would not be astronomical.

I hope this helps...

[FW17]

Do road cars use active suspension?

[turbof1]

We are talking about 23 years ago. Even if it had more processing power, they carried around 20+ kg of computing hardware around just for the suspension. A Raspberry weights 31 grams.

The processor used on the Lotus T99 was a TMS320C25. To can look up its statistics, but it was a single chip processor weighing around 6.5 grams.

It is true that the original T99 active system weighed rather more than 20Kg, but that included a complete hydraulic system (pump, pressure control , reservoir, accumulators and pipes), an electronic control system (power supplies, a signal conditioning system, a data system, transducers and associated cabling). The hydraulic system and data system already exists today, and a modern CAN system would help (I recall the cabling of the T99 weighed around 5 Kg), so a guess the added weight of an active system would not be astronomical.

I hope this helps...

Yeah thanks. What little information there is available in public is often times unfortunaly misguiding. Given the details of your post it is save to say you are accurate on this.

Cheers for the info mate!

[Gridlock]

Do road cars use active suspension?

4x4s, high end sports cars, luxobarges, fire engines....

[FW17]

Do road cars use active suspension?

4x4s, high end sports cars, luxobarges, fire engines....

Are any of the systems comparable to the F1 systems? Aren't most adaptive?

[Jolle]

Do road cars use active suspension?

4x4s, high end sports cars, luxobarges, fire engines....

Are any of the systems comparable to the F1 systems? Aren't most adaptive?

No. Most road systems are partly (hybrid) active compared to the hay days of F1 active suspension. A FB14B had no springs or coils. They actively pulled and pushed the wheels up and down. No pressure in the system was all four wheels up in the air! On a road car it's used to cope with different kinds of bad roads without loosing the sporty stiff setup. They are systems to loosen or tighten up the springs and dampers. The suspension itself (mostly) still comes from the springs (air or steel).

[godlameroso]

Did they use something like this?

[DaveW]

A FB14B had no springs or coils. They actively pulled and pushed the wheels up and down. No pressure in the system was all four wheels up in the air! .

I think you need to read Patent 4861066 (Frank Dernie). This is probably not quite the system you describe, but I suspect it is close. That describes a system that is not unlike a "Citroen" system - air springs, fairly conventional dampers with ride height & load distribution control. That is unlike the Lotus system (as seen on the T99) which had emulated springs & dampers and a few other niceties. The test is the iteration rate. Dernie claims a frame rate of 64/sec (column 3 line 18). The Lotus system frame rate was 1000/sec.

[DaveW]

Did they use something like this?

I believe that system started life as the "Aura Systems" suspension (see US Patent 4892328). The corner actuators are "voice coils". They would have the bandwidth to emulate springs, dampers, and even "preview", but they do have one big issue. They are not good at carrying a steady state load (when the back emf collapses, the coils tend to melt). I believe the "Bose" system uses anti-roll bar attachments to carry the weight of the vehicle.

[roon]

As it relates to active suspension: would a KERS suspension be worth the weight in F1? Just curious. Any idea how much energy is absorbed by springs & dampers throughout a lap? I assume not much since damper radiators don't really seem to be a thing outside of trophy truck & baja type racing. Sometimes they have fins on the damper bodies in those venues.

[godlameroso]

Probably no more than a few kW per lap. Audi played around with rotary regenerative dampers, and that's all they were able to get every few km. It has some promise as far as improving rotary damper performance, which to me overshadows any regenerative aspect.

[Tim.Wright]

I recall something around 100w average on a lap. I dont have the precise number but basically its fk all.

[bill shoe]

This goes a bit off-topic, but why did the 1987 Lotus 99T car get its butt kicked by the 1987 Williams?

Lotus had the same Honda engines and Senna as driver, nothing uncompetitive there. The active suspension should have been great at maintaining consistent contact patch forces while stabilizing the aero platform.

The 1988 Lotus 100T also really got its butt handed to it, but by the 1988 McLaren MP-4/4. That was with both cars on passive conventional suspension. So it seems like that generation of Ducarouge-designed Lotus F1 cars were pretty bad.

Here is Jackie Stewart giving negative feedback on the 100T --
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOiWlpo_92s

Any other insights into what exactly made the 99T weak? It only won on the two street circuits (Monaco and Detroit).

[1158]

This goes a bit off-topic, but why did the 1987 Lotus 99T car get its butt kicked by the 1987 Williams?

Lotus had the same Honda engines and Senna as driver, nothing uncompetitive there. The active suspension should have been great at maintaining consistent contact patch forces while stabilizing the aero platform.

The 1988 Lotus 100T also really got its butt handed to it, but by the 1988 McLaren MP-4/4. That was with both cars on passive conventional suspension. So it seems like that generation of Ducarouge-designed Lotus F1 cars were pretty bad.

Here is Jackie Stewart giving negative feedback on the 100T --
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOiWlpo_92s

Any other insights into what exactly made the 99T weak? It only won on the two street circuits (Monaco and Detroit).

Williams had an exclusive deal with Honda for the RA167-E in '87. Lotus used the RA166-E from '86. Interesting that you bring up the T99 as there was just an article posted on several sites about it that provides at least a few ideas as to your question.

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/ayrto ... 71703/?s=1

[Sevach]

4x4s, high end sports cars, luxobarges, fire engines....

Are any of the systems comparable to the F1 systems? Aren't most adaptive?

No. Most road systems are partly (hybrid) active compared to the hay days of F1 active suspension. A FB14B had no springs or coils. They actively pulled and pushed the wheels up and down. No pressure in the system was all four wheels up in the air! On a road car it's used to cope with different kinds of bad roads without loosing the sporty stiff setup. They are systems to loosen or tighten up the springs and dampers. The suspension itself (mostly) still comes from the springs (air or steel).

I think the Mclarens are true active, Porsche has active anti roll bars combined with normal springs and dampers.