Quote:
Originally Posted by chillibowl
question then,
why cant weight and size reduction happen at the same time as an active suspension system is developed? will the latter add weight or make the designers less interested in changing the car dimensions until they sort their active suspension system out? too many changes to make at once? too costly or complicated given he cap system? all, none, or some of the above?
also could be way off base here, but how much of this active suspension is only necessary because they are going down the wrong engine path?
|
Good questions. My opinions...
I think they could tackle things like weight/size reduction and other things at the same time, but as you speculate, it might be too much at once. For example I think I read somewhere that one of the reasons they abandoned more "active" components in the current spec (or I might be confusing it with the 2026 spec) was that it was just too much going on. That they would have to solve multiple "new" problems at the same time.
The limitations of the new power unit are driving the need for drag reduction (with a more comprehensive active aero being the targeted solution). I don't think the active suspension is tightly tied to solving the power unit issue, but maybe it is just another way to help optimize aero (i.e. active ride height changes might result in less drag on straights... see comments on this in article below).
It would be interesting to hear from an F1 designer if an active suspension system would be less, the same or heavier than a current mechanical solution. It should be mechanically "simpler" and maybe even with less parts, but is swapping things like springs and dampers for actuators and hydraulic pumps moving the weight in the right or wrong direction? I don't know.
F1 for years has been trying to tighten controls around improvements to the mechanical suspension systems. As active systems were previously banned, teams have continued to try to implement passive systems that give some of the benefits of an active solution. Recent mechanical solutions that have been banned includes Inerters, Front to rear interlinked suspension (FRIC) and hydraulic heave springs. I think banning that tech was primarily to help reduce cost and to try to stop expensive mechanical arms race on suspension design. My idea is that moving to an active suspension setup, allows cheaper solutions for the problems those complex mechanical solutions were trying to solve.
Here is a few year old article that talks about it and how there probably is a desire by the technical staff to do it, but that it might be too big of a change to implement.
https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/a...-but-wont-get/
Richard