Ferrari F14T

[PlatinumZealot]

Well you all can say what you want but designing sports cars or any car that uses mostly mechanical grip the designers always aim for flat or very nearly flat suspension arms. This is to minimise track width change under suspension compression and extension.

Another, probably major effect of having your suspension arms at a large angle from parallel to the ground is that you change the roll centre of the car. Generally designers aim to get the roll centre just below or as close to the centre of gravity as possible. While I am no suspension expert there is a lot of information about this. Having the roll centre closer to the centre of gravity by using flatter suspension arms/geometry means that for the same roll rate you can run softer anti roll bar springs or less roll by using the same anti roll bar springs.

Any suspension experts please feel free to correct me and can you provide some sources so I can learn more for next time.

I understand what you are saying still. I would design a car with near level arms too. It is a good practice because the vertical loads are more directly taken by the springs and dampers. On the flip-side with steeply sloped arms a larger portion of the vertical loads go into the arms them selves which may not be desirable.

[flyboy2160]

Try not to get too deep into a generic suspension design debate and away from the 14T. There are specific suspension threads.

[trinidefender]

Well you all can say what you want but designing sports cars or any car that uses mostly mechanical grip the designers always aim for flat or very nearly flat suspension arms. This is to minimise track width change under suspension compression and extension.

Another, probably major effect of having your suspension arms at a large angle from parallel to the ground is that you change the roll centre of the car. Generally designers aim to get the roll centre just below or as close to the centre of gravity as possible. While I am no suspension expert there is a lot of information about this. Having the roll centre closer to the centre of gravity by using flatter suspension arms/geometry means that for the same roll rate you can run softer anti roll bar springs or less roll by using the same anti roll bar springs.

Any suspension experts please feel free to correct me and can you provide some sources so I can learn more for next time.

I understand what you are saying still. I would design a car with near level arms too. It is a good practice because the vertical loads are more directly taken by the springs and dampers. On the flip-side with steeply sloped arms a larger portion of the vertical loads go into the arms them selves which may not be desirable.

You missed my point totally about the roll centre of a car and how suspension geometry effects it. Go do some reading on roll centre buddy.

Saying that having horizontal arms means that "vertical loads are more directly taken by springs and dampers" actually doesn't make sense. To get the least stress as possible on the chassis you want the pushrod or pullrod as vertical as possible. I was referring to the angle of the wishbones in the suspension which I was saying are generally better when horizontal. But yes this is my last post on the topic here. If you want we can move this to a new topic or pm.

[PlatinumZealot]

Well you all can say what you want but designing sports cars or any car that uses mostly mechanical grip the designers always aim for flat or very nearly flat suspension arms. This is to minimise track width change under suspension compression and extension.

Another, probably major effect of having your suspension arms at a large angle from parallel to the ground is that you change the roll centre of the car. Generally designers aim to get the roll centre just below or as close to the centre of gravity as possible. While I am no suspension expert there is a lot of information about this. Having the roll centre closer to the centre of gravity by using flatter suspension arms/geometry means that for the same roll rate you can run softer anti roll bar springs or less roll by using the same anti roll bar springs.

Any suspension experts please feel free to correct me and can you provide some sources so I can learn more for next time.

I understand what you are saying still. I would design a car with near level arms too. It is a good practice because the vertical loads are more directly taken by the springs and dampers. On the flip-side with steeply sloped arms a larger portion of the vertical loads go into the arms them selves which may not be desirable.

You missed my point totally about the roll centre of a car and how suspension geometry effects it. Go do some reading on roll centre buddy.

Saying that having horizontal arms means that "vertical loads are more directly taken by springs and dampers" actually doesn't make sense. To get the least stress as possible on the chassis you want the pushrod or pullrod as vertical as possible. I was referring to the angle of the wishbones in the suspension which I was saying are generally better when horizontal. But yes this is my last post on the topic here. If you want we can move this to a new topic or pm.

You are telling me to do reading on roll centers? I see you haven't heard about me.. anyway.
I think you need to do some more reading on front roll centres in modern Formula 1 and see that Roll center talk is old school stuff.

[diffuser]

Well you all can say what you want but designing sports cars or any car that uses mostly mechanical grip the designers always aim for flat or very nearly flat suspension arms. This is to minimise track width change under suspension compression and extension.

Another, probably major effect of having your suspension arms at a large angle from parallel to the ground is that you change the roll centre of the car. Generally designers aim to get the roll centre just below or as close to the centre of gravity as possible. While I am no suspension expert there is a lot of information about this. Having the roll centre closer to the centre of gravity by using flatter suspension arms/geometry means that for the same roll rate you can run softer anti roll bar springs or less roll by using the same anti roll bar springs.

Any suspension experts please feel free to correct me and can you provide some sources so I can learn more for next time.

I went back to look at pictures of cars from 2009 thru 2014 (where there were fewer restrictions on nose height). What I found was all kinds of variations in the angle of attack of the suspension. I believe the only reason we're seeing a trend to flatter front suspensions this year is cause of the nose height restrictions. I get the feeling that the suspension geometry angle of attack that is chosen, is simply to meet some other goal they're trying to achieve. That might be getting more air under the nose, aero benefits, ease of access, familiarity or cost(to name just a few).


I will add that Red Bull's front suspension angle of attack appeared to have changed little over that same time.


Actually when you look at the 2011



and compare it to 2014




the angle is almost the same.

[f1universe]

Do you guys think that the car will perfrom worse without FRIC?, and will it make any impact on Kimi's driving?, good or bad.

[The Moderator]

Do you guys think that the car will perfrom worse without FRIC?, and will it make any impact on Kimi's driving?, good or bad.

both cars doesn't have FRIC

[Kiril Varbanov]

Do you guys think that the car will perfrom worse without FRIC?, and will it make any impact on Kimi's driving?, good or bad.

both cars doesn't have FRIC

Both cars do have FRIC system on board, though shaped to a different extent, compared to the rivals. Indeed, Lotus, Merc and Ferrari were the early adopters of the concept.

Personally I don't think it will have large effect, such as half a second per perfect lap. Replace the hydraulic chamber with third heave element and test; adjust suspension parameters and bit of aero. OK, not that simple really, but sort of.

Moreover, teams would have been frantic about the ban has the order had dramatic and immediate imminent effect.

[f300v10]

New version of the front wing with only 1 slot in the mainplane:

Old:


New:

[Hovepeter]

New version of the front wing with only 1 slot in the mainplane:

Old:
http://img1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Fer ... 794918.jpg

New:
http://img3.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Fer ... 794919.jpg

can someone tell me why they are doing that? i heard that these slots helps the cars aero during cornering to get more efficient downforce is that right? is there anything these slots does that makes the car less efficient at a straight line and there for not suits hockenheim? sorry for the bad english.

[elFranZ]

adding slots on a wing is everything but "efficient". You may gain some DF points, but this will also add some drag.
Given the 4 straights in Hockenheim, this may be a wise choice for them.

[Hovepeter]

adding slots on a wing is everything but "efficient". You may gain some DF points, but this will also add some drag.
Given the 4 straights in Hockenheim, this may be a wise choice for them.

oh okay. i must have misunderstood something then! thank you

[wesley123]

Those slots are in the wing to give a more consistent level of downforce. By getting more air under the wing the flow under the wing is more consistent, thus, there is less loss in downforce.

The wings change a little in that aspect. The one with one slot in the main plane also has the main plane raised overall, improving flow under the wing.

Changes like these (raising the mainplane or more slots in the wing) give more consistent levels of downforce at the expense of peak downforce.

[ringo]

Slotted wings are more efficient in terms of L/D ratios.
Though there may be instances where it may not be true, considering the different kinds of drag, skin, form etc. that may be predominant and certain speeds. So yes in this case it may be for less drag, but not most of the time for slotted wings.

[elFranZ]

Slotted wings are more efficient in terms of L/D ratios.
Though there may be instances where it may not be true, considering the different kinds of drag, skin, form etc. that may be predominant and certain speeds. So yes in this case it may be for less drag, but not most of the time for slotted wings.

thanks for clarifying.