Red Bull's ride height system....

Yes sounds feasible that.

 

Clearly the Red Bull guys are trying to hide something..
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

.

 

System deemed illegal.

If so then are Reb Bulls points gone? Or anyone else's?

 

I'm pretty confused by the situation surrounding Red Bull. On one hand the FIA says Red Bull's suspension is legal, and on the other they flat-out say any system that mainpulates ride-height is not. The real question then is whether Red Bull ride-heights really are the same between quali and race. Visually approximating a few mm can't be easy, but then again some top teams seem to be convinced they are.

So hree scenarios are:

1. RBR isn't actually doing anything. Ride-height is different between quali and race.
2. RBR is so clever they have a system that changes RH while somehow being legal (in similar spirit to 'F-duct').
3. FIA is back to it's wonky ways of evaluating things.

 

Given F1 I think option 4 is most likely

 

Maybe Webber was changing his undies...

 

There have been a few attempts to have an active on the road. Some cars today employ a mild versions, like the active body roll control on the Mercedes S-class. A few prototypes for some very well known sportscars have had actives but when it came to production runs the manufactures backed away.

The beauty of it is that is decouples ride and roll rates entirely. So you can have a car that rides like a Rolls Royce and corners flat as hell. But this is a little off topic...

 

I read a few years ago, in Race Car engineering I think, that active suspension coupled with today's aerodynamics would put unsustainable loads on the driver.

 

Hello everyone. This is my first post here. I'm really interested in this whole active suspension thing. I think it's possible RB have found a way to get away with this, not because of some loophole in the regs, but they get away with it because they know the pattern in which the FIA checks the cars' legality. They obviously know what the inspectors check and what they don't. So if they are running an active suspension they have found a way to hide it right from under the nose of the FIA. Also, I don't think they're running an active suspension that adjust in the middle of the race, but they're probably just running two ride heights. One for qualy and one for the race.

Ferrari are supposedly running a system that they adjust during the pit stop in the race. If that's the case, then it's not illegal. The fact that the F10 was much quicker than the RB right after the pit stop in Bahrain supports this opinion. So while the RB kept rising as the fuel was burnt off, the F10 got it's suspension reset and was running a few mm lower than the RB at the end of Bahrain.

Just my $.02

 

More than likely that Red bull has done is they have come up with a suspension geometry package that rapidly changes the spring rate between full tanks and empty tanks. This can be achieved between spring design, rocker arm design bump stops and bellville washers on the damper shafts.

When the weight of extra fuel is applied all of these parts come into play to stiffen up the spring rate keeping the ride height where it needs to be but still allows for suspension movement over bumps and such.

Lots of work and testing required to get it right but perfectly legal under the scope of the rules.

 

Red Bull do not automatically know when their cars are to be checked as random checks can be carried out at any time under section 24.4 (a):


24) SCRUTINEERING:

24.4 The scrutineers may :
a) check the eligibility of a car or of a competitor at any time during an Event.

(Taken from: http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules_and_regulations/sporting_regulations/8688/fia.html ).

With all the focus and suspicion being centred on Red Bull at the moment, they would even more likely to be at the end of surprise inspections throughout the race weekend.

Besides that, I seriously doubt that Red Bull would even contemplate attempting to circumnavigate the rules in the manner in which you suggest as the penalty for such blatant cheating would be severe. The first thing Jean Todt would want to do would be to ban them from F1 in order to stamp his authority on the sport and make others think twice before cheating.
Don't believe JT would take such a severe course of action?, I wouldn't bet against it and I don't think he'd lose much sleep over losing Red Bull to make his point.

 

yep...I reckon they'd be mad to be cheat.

 

Like that ever stopped anyone

 

Usually gets covered by: "Seemed like a good idea at the time!"

 

Welcome. Helluva first post! ..... Firstly accuse the fastest team on the grid of blatant cheating (which I very much doubt) and then;

Source? "We" certainly haven't heard anything......

We see the pitstops! The only thing they sometimes change is the front wing - Nothing else. And, remember, they can't do it remotely as in "the old days" - Setup data and telemetry is now a one way street: car -> pits, the reverse is banned.

Now, beast *may* have a point with clever suspension geometry -"Rising rate" setups are pretty well understood, so maybe they've done something like that. However, I think they've simply built a great car that works across all fuel loads - No more, no less.

My 02c, cheers,
Ian

 

Amazing how that works.
Usually followed by the word "WHAHAPPEN'D?"

 

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2010/03/melbourne-the-low-down-on-the-latest-tech-ideas/

I would think the easiest way to change the ride height during the pit stop is to have the driver adjust something. I'm not actually sure what James Allen is looking at. Maybe being at the races he gets views we don't.

I don't know if RB are cheating. I think it's possible, and it's nothing new in F1, but nobody knows for sure. I hope the FIA clarifies the issue in China. It will be interesting to see if Mclaren go through with their own ride height system. Moreover, I hope the FIA does allow the teams to make ride height changes in parc ferme to squash any doubts.

 

No doubt - Very interesting link btw - Thanks. I'm about to ask him what he meant by;

OK - So please explain it to us

+1 Horner is *adamant* that they're not (of course )

+1 - Thus far, they've clarified the rules and inspected the RBR, declaring it legal of course.

I too would like parc ferme to be pretty much abolished. But not to the extent of completely "new" cars appearing as in years past - The teams pushed that too far, Mad Max got pissed, and here we are....... Unfortunately, a rule change such as this would need unanimous approval of the teams, and that ain't gonna happen (Is it?)

Cheers,
Ian

 

"Pending moderation" right now......

Just above my comment, a guy says;

I don't "like" that solution ("moveable aerodynamic aid" anyone?). BUT - it could be done with electronic load-sensors (?)

Cheers,
Ian

 

There is no real logic in how things are done in F1, what I said basically was someone 'calling the kettle black'.

Funny how THAT works in F1.

 

and he responded with:

"They" seem to suggest it's a pitman, rather than the jockey making the tweak..... If true, I'm surprised the TV hasn't picked it up...... I dunno....

Cheers,
Ian

 

By no means an expert on this .

How about changing the viscosity if the fluid in the dampers with an external magnetic charge/ force of some description.

Cheers

 

Like this ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetorheological_damper

That could change the damping/rebound but not the ride height.
A good idea though.

 

Apparently Ferrari adjusts the suspension ride height in the pits at stops for tire changes.
Like all the teams used to tweek front wing angle with a speed handle during stops.

I have to pay attention to Ferrari's stops better next race.

IF these tweeks are allowed then why most teams dont implement them is beyond me.
Especially with the dramatic changes in weight and load distribution that no refueling rules present.