The relative benefits of a pull rod suspension

[astracrazy]

filming in the simulator?

[myurr]

They work the same, but the secondary benefits are more important.
Key words Aero Dynamics and C.O.G.

Not becuase Ferrari and Mclaren never use it can to you come to the conclusion it's useless. Redbull never run KERS in 2009, neither did Brawn. Is KERS useless now?
There could be so many reasons for not using the pull rod suspension in 2010, maybe the car was already too far into developement. We know Ferrari began early.
Maybe they wanted to stick to what they know works.

I am not saying it's the holy grail, but it's definitely a step in the right direction. It has no drawback and comes with some nice benefits aero wise and C.o.G wise, especially for single diffuser cars.
I said a similar thing about the F duct not having net drawbacks and some thought it was too good to be true.

I never once claimed it's useless. It certainly has it's place as part of an overall package and concept, however I don't believe it to be an innovative or essential development in and of itself. I certainly wouldn't start with a pull rod suspension and then structure the car and aero around it. I'd start with the aero concept and then see if the pull rod fits into that design or not.

Also the F-duct does have some drawbacks. For one it reduces the overall downforce available from the rear wing by taking up space on the main plane. It also has a minor effect on the CoG by placing more bodywork higher up - although this is probably in the same order of magnitude as the CoG advantage that the pull rod would give.

[ajdavison2]

the past 3 pages have just been about pull rod suspension more or less, let's get back on topic, or we might aswell just start a new thread: The advantages and disadvantages of pull rod suspension.

[ringo]

I never once claimed it's useless. It certainly has it's place as part of an overall package and concept, however I don't believe it to be an innovative or essential development in and of itself. I certainly wouldn't start with a pull rod suspension and then structure the car and aero around it. I'd start with the aero concept and then see if the pull rod fits into that design or not.

Also the F-duct does have some drawbacks. For one it reduces the overall downforce available from the rear wing by taking up space on the main plane. It also has a minor effect on the CoG by placing more bodywork higher up - although this is probably in the same order of magnitude as the CoG advantage that the pull rod would give.

I don't know the order of the building of the car. But i think the engine is first to begin with. The whole idea of "building around", be it a driver or part, i don't prescribe to and i don't think teams do that; regardless of how important one element of the car is.
Not becuase i think it's relevant does it mean the car should be built around it.
The pull rod can fit into any design, it's not a challenge to do it. Redbull's example makes it much easier for other teams to follow suit with pull rod.


The F duct weight is almost negligible, it's just a few folds of carbon fiber. It probably weighs less than a roll hoop camera.
It doesn't take up space on the main plane. It's basically a blade. The only risk is how well it's designed to seal when it's off, and how the fin interacts with crossflows. Whatever little cons it has, it has a substantial net gain. I never heard of a team complaining about the F duct as a disadvantage on any track.
Monza was the true test of it's flexibility and Mclaren used it, contrary to what most people expected.
I am not touting the pull rod as the next DDD, but it's definitely something the teams shouldn't leave the factory without. It's that slight advantage that adds up to all the other little advantages to make a big difference.

Knowing how well Mclaren want to be back on top, i think they will come with the pull rod suspension. The trend in F1 is to use whatever the winning team is using, insignificant as it is.

[raymondu999]

to be fair McLaren did kind of attempt to replicate the effect of the RB5/6's tight ass by using their sidepods sloping downwards, and later on after they installed the EBD, sloping towards the car's centerline.

If we look at the engine cover though, it looks as if the middle part is very tightly wrapped around the engine, and it seems rather ginormous to me. could it be that a pullrod might not benefit them much given that the airflow would be blocked by the engine cover anyways?

[PlatinumZealot]

Look on this awesome plateau of efficiency.



Again, it's a no-brainer for any team who wants to be WCC in 2011. Just ask Adrian Newey!

[myurr]

It doesn't take up space on the main plane. It's basically a blade. The only risk is how well it's designed to seal when it's off, and how the fin interacts with crossflows. Whatever little cons it has, it has a substantial net gain. I never heard of a team complaining about the F duct as a disadvantage on any track.

Sorry but you're fundamentally wrong there. It isn't a simple blade, it had a triangular cross section and did cause a net loss in downforce. Several teams were quoted throughout the year as saying that the gains didn't out weigh the benefits, particularly at high downforce tracks where on several occasions teams took the system off their cars.

Monaco was the real test for the f-duct in that regard and I believe McLaren were the only team to run it, and they didn't do particularly well.

I am not touting the pull rod as the next DDD, but it's definitely something the teams shouldn't leave the factory without. It's that slight advantage that adds up to all the other little advantages to make a big difference.

Knowing how well Mclaren want to be back on top, i think they will come with the pull rod suspension. The trend in F1 is to use whatever the winning team is using, insignificant as it is.

Again I believe it's likely that the pull rod will fit McLaren's design philosophy for next year and that they will run it.

However I wouldn't be surprised or worried if they did not, and I honestly believe you to be wrong when you say that teams shouldn't leave the factory without it. It's not a new idea, having been on F1 cars over 20 years ago, and it was never a banned technology. The teams must have had good reasons for switching to the push rod setup, and it is likely that those reasons hold just as true today as they did then. Perhaps with certain designs the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, but it is in no way clear cut enough for anyone to claim that teams would be stupid not to use it.

[raymondu999]

hasn't Mclaren used pullrod in the past? Once upon a time? If they have, they'd have past data on it, and if they deem that it's better off that their design has a pullrod they'll put it in for sure.

[shamikaze]

Why not start with it and have true fake exhaust pipes in the usual position ..I guess they had enugh time to prepare something more than a sticker...
anyways back on topic

Isn't that exactly what RB did last year this time round ?

GReetz,

S.

[Lurk]

I'm not an expert but : main advantage of RedBull suspension is to free space above gearbox by moving components on each side of it, right?
Is it possible to build a proper pushrod suspension with dampers, torsion bars, etc on each side of gearbox?


edit: Whitmarsh seems confident but realistic. More than Domenicali at least...

[SiLo]

So much about pull-rod suspension....brain hurts....

Would be funny if RB went to push rod for this year now...

[marcush.]

I'm not an expert but : main advantage of RedBull suspension is to free space above gearbox by moving components on each side of it, right?
Is it possible to build a proper pushrod suspension with dampers, torsion bars, etc on each side of gearbox?


edit: Whitmarsh seems confident but realistic. More than Domenicali at least...

No .as you need the angle of the pushrod going up .It will widen the gearbox even more.

Look at it closely RB6 Gearbox is nothing above the top mounting face and compare this to any other gearbox.. mclaren and Renault(?) shown here

[747heavy]

well don´t wont too digress to much, keeping in mind that this is the MP4-26 thread.

The question, which could/should be ask is:
" If pull-rod suspension, is the best thing since sliced bread, and works even better with a single deck diffussor and no EBD (since it was re-invented/used on the RB5 which had non of both), why it took, even a "genius" like Newey about 9 years (Arrows A20 in 2000) to consider it again?
Surely all the advantages like CoG height,packaging and lower/narrower rear would have been there to be had, all the while.
Why now?

I´m sure we will see some others cars with pull rod suspension next year, because there is a lot of "monkey see, monkey do" in F1 and racing in general, but I´m equally sure, that not every car with pull rod suspension will turn out to be a "world beater" and that we will see cars with push rod suspension beeing very competetive.

I would agree, with the statement amde here by others, that the sum of a good design is greater then just the addition of it´s parts, and that there is more then one way to design (and drive) a race/championship winning car.

Maybe Newey takes a similar approach to F1, as da Vinci to life

Life is pretty simple:
You do some stuff. Most fails. Some works. You do more of what works.
If it works big, others quickly copy it.
Then you do something else.
The trick is the doing something else.

Leonardo da Vinci

While the rest of the field may still wonders what the secret of the RB6 is, and is busy to try and copy the trick bits (monkey see,moneky do), he if off re-inventing/perhaps even inventing, the next best thing.
Will be interesting to see, what turns up at the first tests/race.

as for some reading on the pull rod/suspension design subject, for the ones interested in it.
This is another opinion about it, with some overall design parameters to consider.

[PlatinumZealot]

That is the thing.. The components on the car are like weapons. Some weapons are better than others, those better weapons maybe more difficult to use but once you master them no body can stand against you.

For the posters who said Pull-rod was used in the past by Mclaren, who are not using it now so it's not as good as people make it out to be: that's not a valid argument. Times change and things change; that was the distant past, now we have so many engineering tools available, even a regular joe can analyse a suspension and aerodynamic setup in his bedroom. It is obvious that with modern computing Newey has used the capability to fully unlock and fully exploit the true potential of the pull-rod putting all the other teams to shame in the rear Downforce and handling department!

So, I think the time is ripe for Mclaren to switch to pull-rod and so I have a strong belief that the MP4-26 has pull-rod suspension on it right now. If not now then the MP4-27 will.

[forty-two]

Mods,

As riveting as the discussion about pull/push suspension is (and no, I am not being sarcastic, I think it is very interesting), might this discussion be better held in a seperate thread?

I suspect that the discussion will continue well into the season, and is likely to be relevant to various cars, not just the MP4-26 / RB7.

What does everyone else think?