A new way to drive an F1 car? "3D driving"

[WillerZ]

My solution is give the driver live augmented control over the boundaries of the suspension system.

Why suspension? On an F1 car its so damn stiff it doesn't really do anything.

Since this is a future thing, it could be accompanied by a move from 13" rims/deep sidewall-tyres to 24" rims and sprayed-on tyres. Then we'd see some suspension movement.

[Nowhereman]

Me I think in other aspects of "active Suspension"
Lets talk miltary first.
Well understood technology is helmet mounted site technology where the weapons follow eye movement.
Well, I can easily see technology in their helmets that allows them to 1, see oncoming things like specific turns that can have pre programmed suspension setups. When the driver sees a specific aspect of the course, he then transmits via his helmet what the suspension should be like for that period of time.
Or maybe just speak like "turn 1, or home straight, etc.
The suspension would then via magnetic fluid adjust viscosity to adapt to the need at the moment.
Same thing for DRS; when the driver had it available he could just say "on" or off instantly, which would be much faster than physically hitting a switch, safer too.
You could take this to unbelievable levels with engine mapping by turn instead of overall.
Catch my drift...

[Lycoming]

All of that sounds like the sort of thing that looks really cool in a sci-fi flick, but then when you actually try to implement, you realize it is a titanic amount of effort for zero gain.

Kinda like kinect. Nowhere near as cool in real life as it would have seemed if it had been seen in Minority Report

[ringo]

It may have an advantage in long high G corners wich seem to feature on most modern tracks. Turkey turn 8, barcleona turn 3 is it?
China and it''s snail turns.
If a driver feels he needs less understeer, he could twist the grips of the wheel and effectively tighten up one side of the car, and this would affect the poise of the car throughout the turn.
This can benefit teams greatly, especially to slower teams that have to make the greatest compromise for the rest of the track.
Tom mention maximum Camber settings used by redbull which was causing graining.
Well, you would no longer have to use that max setting, if the driver is going to induce the right roll and poise of the car for the turns that he needs.
So there is an advantage, it actually makes the car less compromised, because it will effectively have a main setup and the twisting grips provide the deviant setups.

[PlatinumZealot]

It would be nice if somebody could code it into a simulator game.

[Nowhereman]

All of that sounds like the sort of thing that looks really cool in a sci-fi flick, but then when you actually try to implement, you realize it is a titanic amount of effort for zero gain.

Kinda like kinect. Nowhere near as cool in real life as it would have seemed if it had been seen in Minority Report

Does not need to be that involved.
Brake bias, engine map, shock absorber valving; you could do a lot with just those three aspects and never take your hands off the wheel.
That level of sophistication is in use today plus much more.
The military just does not advertise.....

[flynfrog]

Adjusting the ARB is still passive. You set it and forget it, it's not really the driver modulating it and the opposite sides are pysically linked with it too.

I remember the DTM E30 M3's had adjustable ARB blades....

Anyway, since this new, conceptual system could only exist in F1 time in the future, it is very possible that F1 cars will not have roll bars then. Think of the Mclaren MP-12C, it has no roll bars.... i don't know if you are thinking what I am thinking.

There is a lot of possibilities with having the driver modulate the suspension.

A simple servo on the a ARB attachment point would have the same effect. Or you could use a needle valve to the shock resivor, Or you could use the electromagnetic fluid that Delphi uses in Chevy.

Adjusting the shocks is adjusting the dampening not the stiffness. If you wanted to adjust stiffness it should be in the spring rate. I know there is overlap ect.. :hand waving: JT is going to come in and yell at me but in general spring rate is force sensitive where dampening is shaft speed sensitive.

[PlatinumZealot]

Yes, The ideal damper has a damping force proportional to the it's speed. The Ideal spring as a spring force proportional to it's extension. that part is elementary.

When I get some time I will try to make some sort of concept. Might select a scenario or two and see how adjusting the stiffness, or the damping or the rideheight(!) can come into play. The Mercedes s-class can make these adjust ments in miliseconds... I wonder how things will translate with a human...

[gruntguru]

Here's a list of things you could usefully fiddle with during a corner
1) brake balance
2) fiddle brakes
3) diff vectoring
4) aero
5)sta bar ratio
Whichever you choose I suspect you end up eating Armco more often than not.

One of the more sensible posts in this thread. I believe 1, 2, and 3 would be the key items to control (rather than stiffness and damping as suggested by PZ).

You could do all three with an intuitive control built into the steering wheel. Perhaps make the entire steering wheel a force sensitive (rigid) joystick?

- Push forward with the left hand and pull back with the right to yaw right (more braking to the right side or more drive to the left).
- Push the wheel up for more rear braking and down for more front braking. (AWD vehicles could also vector the drive fore and aft with the same action)

MODERATORS. Any chance of moving this thread to "Engine Transmission and Controls" forum where it belongs?

[timbo]

Any young GP2 whipper-snapper can jump into an F1 car and wring its neck to blazing lap-times in a few testing sessions. It drives just the same as their GP-2 cars they say, it just brakes better (Hey this car is damn fast! but it sure is easy to drive at the limit! Hey my tyres are blistering because I'm driving to fast! Yep lemme slow down to 70% of the cars capability!).

Umm, so anyone who qualifies for the Olympics finals can run 100m faster than 10 seconds, should too easy! Well, yeah. That's because they have QUALIFIED for the Olympics.
Young GP2 whipper-snappers have all probably about 7-10 years of driving experience and better fitness than F1 champions 30 years ago.

I am proposing to make driving more interesting and challenging for the worlds greatest drivers by implementing some system that makes the car feel like an extension of their bodies and that will increase the capabilities of the car if mastered. The Limit of the car is now augmented by the limit of the driver.

You complain that F1 drivers are too consistent and yet propose a tool to adjust car attitude to their liking?
Like, "hey I'm entering a corner and there's too much understeer, let me twist this handle and it goes away!"
Well, maybe at first some would be more capable of controlling the car this way than the others, but over time everyone will catch up and it will produce more consistency, not less!

[marmer]

It's alive it's a Christmas miracle

[dren]

I'm in agreement that this will likely throw more cars in the wall than anything if mandated. I think the drivers would probably fix the suspension in accordance with the race engineer and drive it without further input. The items listed by GL and quoted again by GG make sense to me if you want to add more control. Brake bias is already one. I think the drivers already have a lot going on with what they are currently controlling. The massive amounts of money spent on designing these cars go into creating a fast car that's easy to drive. We'd have to revert back to very simplistic suspension systems and aero regulations. Ban wings and mandate flat bottoms. Mandate only one spring and one damper per wheel. Revert back to manual clutches. Change the tires to something thinner. The cars would be slower but more challenging to drive at the limit. But who wants that? I don't.

[PlatinumZealot]

Any young GP2 whipper-snapper can jump into an F1 car and wring its neck to blazing lap-times in a few testing sessions. It drives just the same as their GP-2 cars they say, it just brakes better (Hey this car is damn fast! but it sure is easy to drive at the limit! Hey my tyres are blistering because I'm driving to fast! Yep lemme slow down to 70% of the cars capability!).

Umm, so anyone who qualifies for the Olympics finals can run 100m faster than 10 seconds, should too easy! Well, yeah. That's because they have QUALIFIED for the Olympics.
Young GP2 whipper-snappers have all probably about 7-10 years of driving experience and better fitness than F1 champions 30 years ago.

I am proposing to make driving more interesting and challenging for the worlds greatest drivers by implementing some system that makes the car feel like an extension of their bodies and that will increase the capabilities of the car if mastered. The Limit of the car is now augmented by the limit of the driver.

You complain that F1 drivers are too consistent and yet propose a tool to adjust car attitude to their liking?
Like, "hey I'm entering a corner and there's too much understeer, let me twist this handle and it goes away!"
Well, maybe at first some would be more capable of controlling the car this way than the others, but over time everyone will catch up and it will produce more consistency, not less!

Timbo slice...

I had already answered this question six years ago...

The answer was that the additional controls would give access to a higher level of performance to those who are willing to use it. Just because a tool is accessible doesn't mean everyone will have the same level of mastery. As with everything else manual some drivers will use it better than others.


Semi-active Independently controlled suspension damping to give higher levels of performance has been in use for years, there is a proven performance gain. For those who are questioning why make it manually controlled then? The reason is because as the thread title implies... This is to put the driver in control of the 6 axes of motion of the car. Not just on a single plane (Steering and braking with the heave and roll reacting to that). The driver has live influences on the suspension response if he so chooses. 3D driving.

[PlatinumZealot]

I'm in agreement that this will likely throw more cars in the wall than anything if mandated. I think the drivers would probably fix the suspension in accordance with the race engineer and drive it without further input. The items listed by GL and quoted again by GG make sense to me if you want to add more control. Brake bias is already one. I think the drivers already have a lot going on with what they are currently controlling. The massive amounts of money spent on designing these cars go into creating a fast car that's easy to drive. We'd have to revert back to very simplistic suspension systems and aero regulations. Ban wings and mandate flat bottoms. Mandate only one spring and one damper per wheel. Revert back to manual clutches. Change the tires to something thinner. The cars would be slower but more challenging to drive at the limit. But who wants that? I don't.

It wouldn't be "3D" driving though so those brake control ideas (2D) can be put into another thread. I harkened back to this thread when Guru suggested a similar mechanism on the steering wheel. However.. this thread is about controlling the car in an additional plane of motion.

[timbo]

Timbo slice...

I had already answered this question six years ago...

Yeah, sorry. I was bored and seen this topic and I haven't seen it here for some reason back when it was new

Time flies, that's for sure.
One thing peaked my attention, somewhen in the topic somebody (perhaps it was you) mentioned Hamilton and Vettel as an example of super consistent drivers. I thought, how generous and fair it is to still mention Vettel