Red Bull's Rake and Suspension Set Up

[Webber2011]

As an educated aero guy I could somewhat describe what I expect the rear flow structures to do when they drop the a$$ but even as soon to graduate engineer all I can say about the hydraulics is that I think that heave displacement stores energy in a hydraulic accumulator that's activated in different ways through different valves along the travel which use the energy stored in the accumulator to move the spring seat of the heave unit basically controlling ride height.

There, is that clear as mud?

Coming back to your post again Pierce89, I would really like to see your explanation of what goes on aero wise.
If you get the time I'd love to hear your thoughts

[Pierce89]

As an educated aero guy I could somewhat describe what I expect the rear flow structures to do when they drop the a$$ but even as soon to graduate engineer all I can say about the hydraulics is that I think that heave displacement stores energy in a hydraulic accumulator that's activated in different ways through different valves along the travel which use the energy stored in the accumulator to move the spring seat of the heave unit basically controlling ride height.

There, is that clear as mud?

Coming back to your post again Pierce89, I would really like to see your explanation of what goes on aero wise.
If you get the time I'd love to hear your thoughts

TBH I can't be sure, but I would expect the main effect would be that first the wings will reduce angle and the diffuser will probably be designed to start seeing heavy seperatel at low ride heights. These two effects together will greatly reduce upwash which will probably further "stall" the diffuser and all together you will see a not huge but large induced drag reduction. If you get the diffuser low enough to kill its edge vortices altogether (unlikely) you'd see even more drag reduction. One thing I should point out is the the wings will not "stall" from a reduction in angle , regardless of the drivel put out in the specialized f1 press.

Disclaimer: I've never seen this effect illustrated on a real f1 car, but I have seen it on a generic f1 model on a very accurate(for RANS) CFD suite on a hugely powerful CFD cluster (had to take over the building as it was pretty well impossible to move)that my school got secondhand from NASA(yes that NASA).

[Muulka]

Wow. I know I was pretty vague in my idea, but still I was right and I'm patting myself on the back about it

The hydraulic actuator acting as an energy accumulator in the roll of the car moments so mainly when changing direction and cornering. In subsequent instants, when ended sections where the car "rocked" (on the straights so), the hydraulic accumulator ceding energy to the system by acting on the rocker of the suspension and then the real third element that was going to change the ' from the car's ride height. This meant a raising of the front part of the car a few millimeters with consequent lowering of the rear axle. That dynamic rake of which we had already after the Grand Prix at Silverstone.

Google Translated from http://www.f1analisitecnica.com/2017/01 ... n.html?m=1

Seeing as that website got as fundamental a detail as the author of the TD wrong, I am inclined to discount that website as a source...

[godlameroso]

F1AT is usually more or less right.

[Powerslide]

Wow. I know I was pretty vague in my idea, but still I was right and I'm patting myself on the back about it

The hydraulic actuator acting as an energy accumulator in the roll of the car moments so mainly when changing direction and cornering. In subsequent instants, when ended sections where the car "rocked" (on the straights so), the hydraulic accumulator ceding energy to the system by acting on the rocker of the suspension and then the real third element that was going to change the ' from the car's ride height. This meant a raising of the front part of the car a few millimeters with consequent lowering of the rear axle. That dynamic rake of which we had already after the Grand Prix at Silverstone.

Google Translated from http://www.f1analisitecnica.com/2017/01 ... n.html?m=1

this is correct, its how fric works..to change the angle of the aerodynamics, high rear high downforce. fric might also be adjustable, to work at a chosen speed then the rear start dropping depending on track, high speed or low speed. fric also raises the front end when the rear drops, its grand design so to speak. the raked floor would straighten increasing aerodynamic efficiency

[bigpat]

All this complexity in interlinked suspensions and hydraulic accumulators for ride height control, leads me to believe that Ross Brawn is correct in stating that active suspension should be allowed to return.

All the teams are seeking to imitate actively control, albeit it with hydraulic valves. You can imagine the tens of millions spent on the hardware and simulation, where for tenth of that you can have active suspension, and there everyone will be on an even playing field. As the aero platforms will be stable, it will simplify life as an aerodynamicist for a start!

At over 25 years since it was banned, there isn't anything exotic about it, and the components and programming required are cheap, and very straightforward. Current suspension systems are out of control in complexity in my opinion, and none will trickle down into other categories or road cars, as its all secret squirrel....

[hardingfv32]

At a minimum the current restrictions provide a avenue of technical competition between the teams.

Brian

[gixxer_drew]

In my view, the reason this and similar solutions have been developed is to control the ride height (hence aero), whilst also looking after the tyres (not abusing the tyres with silly spring rates). Successively banning them all has needlessly exposed Pirelli (& they really do need looking after).

Again in my view, the solution in not new. The principle has been used for several years to prop up road vehicles. Banning it will simply make F1 even less interesting.

BTW, The author, or possibly Ferrari, got the reference wrong. I believe that the relevant clause is now 3.16, not 3.15.

Maybe back in 94 this is a big technological leap of some kind that freaked out the rule makers, I dont know I was in High School.

I do know that here in 2017 the tech in production cars, even cheap ones. You can get hydraulically adjusted spring perches for $10 and they are used in dirt track weekend cars in every corner of the US. I hope someone asks the question about the whole relevance thing a bit better and wonders what are we really protecting.
I believe that aero has the power now to make very serious safety improvements in production cars but it will need these kind of technologies to do it well. I say we embrace it.

Wasn't that supposed to be the point of all this?

[Powerslide]

Then there is an unmentioned mystery pair of mechanical brains that use this energy to control the ride height.
The mechanical brains front and rear make the system basically like the Fric suspension except it is two independent systems.

telepathy

thought it did not go through the f.i.a?

[PlatinumZealot]

Alot of teams using this system now.