30 replies to this topic

[desmo]

http://www.gazzetta....6/vandone.shtml

In this article La Gazzetta Dello Sport implies that Ferrari are- and have been for some time- using MR fluid in their unique Sachs rear rotary dampers. Could this be done passively?

[Powersteer]

Io non parlo italiano multo bene? Io non comprendo, il mia dispiace. Thats the best I can do.

[bobqzzi]

MR Fluid?

[desmo]

Magnetorheological damping fluid, sorry. It changes viscosity in response to changing magnetic fields. It's been around a while.

[Powersteer]

Wow, sneaky. That would be boardering active suspension.

[Supercar]

Originally posted by desmo
http://www.gazzetta....6/vandone.shtml

In this article La Gazzetta Dello Sport implies that Ferrari are- and have been for some time- using MR fluid in their unique Sachs rear rotary dampers. Could this be done passively?

Could *what* be done passively? Io non parlo italiano, non comprendo anche.

Without knowing what that article is about, I have a question. If a fully mechanical control algorithm could do the same thing as the MR fluid, would it be called passive?

[Supercar]

The secret fluid of the Ferrari

The red one uses one posterior suspension to bound together magneto-reologico control to rotary shocks-absorber: the video of Vandone explains as it works

The posterior part of the Ferrari 248 F1. ImagoMILAN, 26 september a 2006 - jump in the future, one of the 248 the better crews of F1. The Ferrari uses in fact, at least in via experiences them, one posterior suspension to bound together magneto-reologico control (from 2003) to rotary shocks-absorber to controlled damping. A avvenieristica solution, that it uses a system (similar) of series on the 599 GTB Fiorano and some versions of Audios TT. And the animations video of Fabiano Vandone explain us the operation.
The great innovation is represented from the rotary shocks-absorber: jam and extension do not work for, like those conventional ones, but in spin regarding the axis. All dipping in a fluid with characteristics reologiche, that is able to react to a prestabilito magnetic field. Two magnets, in opposite position, interact with the fluid (enriched with mechanical particles) and of it they modify the viscosity. The advantage is in the speed with which the characteristics of the fluid vary and therefore the participation of the same shocks-absorber.

To bocce firm, it is possible to establish a series of parameters under shape of mapping that allow conditions of job of the optimal suspensions in every feature of the track, on the cordoli and therefore via. That, with the used rigid orders much in F.1, it represents a beautiful advantage. With the ulterior aid of the reduced dimensions that they are integrated very well with the change. Goodness knows that the system is not revealed fundamental above all in Brasi them, where unconnected asphalt is proverbiale and where the World-wide one could be decided.

http://babelfish.altavista.com/

[Canuck]

If they are, that's the sort of brilliant, outside the box legal cheating I love...unless of course there's something about MR fluid being a no-no.

[Supercar]

Originally posted by Canuck
If they are, that's the sort of brilliant, outside the box legal cheating I love...unless of course there's something about MR fluid being a no-no.

We have to read the exact wording what constitutes an active suspension. But I bet they use if for jacking, so that makes it a "moveable aere device"!

[Wuzak]

So, would this be using the fluid itself to create a rising rate geometry effect?

And I take it that there is no actual control by the computer or the driver (both of which would be illegal).

[Supercar]

Now I know why Ferrari has been running those rotary dampers on their cars. The wires that run to the rotary pots are there not for data acquisition (who needs that now!) but to tell the suspension where to move!

[KABA]

There is also mention of it on the FIA website, under the tech innovations for China.

I would look at it as legal as long as there is no ECM controlled magnetic field being used.

[Wuzak]

Originally posted by KABA
There is also mention of it on the FIA website, under the tech innovations for China.

I would look at it as legal as long as there is no ECM controlled magnetic field being used.

On formula1.com there is mention of the suspension being revised over the summer, to better work with the tyres, but no mention of MR fluid.

http://www.formula1....is/767/338.html

[KABA]

Re reading it now I see you are correct.

I was watching the videos on the Gazetta site shortly before reading the FIA site.


Just seems strange that FIA would mention it as a novelty as they have been using the rotary dampers for quite some time.
Maybe it was in the videos where they mentioned that the big advantage is that settings can be changed extremely quickly.

Videos are on the original link. Click on "Le videografiche di Vandone"

[rhm]

That babelfish translation was uniquely unhelpful

I wonder how it alters the response of the damper if there is no electronic control, do they have passive magnets that move in relation to the suspension or something else?

Of course any electro-magnetic control of the fluid is out of the question. Article 10.2.2 states: Any powered device which is capable of altering the configuration or affecting the performance of any
part of the suspension system is forbidden.

[Greg Locock]

Here's Lord's description. 20 watts per shocker, so 10.2.2 looks like it says they are illegal.

http://www.lord.com/...29/Default.aspx

I don't think they really qualify as active suspension, they are more like the switchable settings some cars have for their dampers, except that they are much faster.

Having said that, if you can control the damper fast enough then you can control the ride heights.

[rhm]

Additionally, if they provide any adjustment that can be controlled by the driver, they would fall foul of Article 10.2.3: No adjustment may be made to the suspension system while the car is in motion.

MR Dampers aren't like what we think of conventionally as active suspension where the rideheight of each wheel is directly under computer control by means of servo-valves and hydaulic actuators. But from a systems perspective it is still an 'active system' if there is a computer controlling the response of the damper in real-time in response to sensor inputs. And although they cannot do as much as fully-active suspension (because there is no provision to add energy to the suspension, only to subtract it), they can still achieve many goals. For example, sensing using accelerometers and steering angle, the dampers can stiffen the unidireactionally in order to reduce dive, squat and roll significantly and that is how they are used in road cars already.

Of course all that is highly illegal in F1. Ferrari could have some system that allows adjustment via moving some passive magnets, but again, if it's under the control of the driver it's still illegal. If it's not under control of the driver you'd have to wonder what the benefit is over conventional valving adjustment in the pits.

[Oho]

Well perhaps FIA can ban the wires feeding pover into the dampers as non directly suspension related components influencing aerodynamics..... right...

[Oho]

Originally posted by rhm
Additionally, if they provide any adjustment that can be controlled by the driver, they would fall foul of Article 10.2.3: No adjustment may be made to the suspension system while the car is in motion......

Well I would think F1 cars have or at least could very accurate positioning systems using comibination of GPS, with motion sensors and some Kalman or particle filter like constructs to integrate cars motion, and thus actively adjustable features may be adjusted actively not just reactively with a pre programmed baseline profile over a lap. Is this banned? Or is the variance in the system big enough to pretty much invalidate such a pre programmed baseline.

[imaginesix]

Originally posted by Greg Locock
Here's Lord's description. 20 watts per shocker, so 10.2.2 looks like it says they are illegal.

First of all I should say that I don't have much faith in the accuracy of that article, the question of MR dampers in F1 is interesting to me only from a hypothetical standpoint.

So, rule 10.2.2 states "Any powered device which is capable of altering the configuration or affecting the performance of any part of the suspension system is forbidden." The problem with that is that the suspension is a 'powered device' to begin with; it is powered by road bumps. So it has to be understood that this rule is meant to ban any additional power source from being applied to the suspension. What this means to MR dampers is that there may be scope for the suspension to generate it's own electrical power and apply it to the dampers in a closed system which could make it legal.

Of course, the implementation of the dampening strategy would also have to fit within the regulations, which in article 10.1.2 require that "The suspension system must be so arranged that its response results only from changes in load applied to the wheels." So the input for applying a charge to the MR dampers could come only from load sensors from each corner. (This ignores the fact that springs are illegal according to the strict interpretation of 10.1.2, I think).

In sum, depending on how the hairs are split in reading the regulations, I find that there may be an interpretation that allows the possibility for MR dampers to be used (legally) in F1.

[mini696]

I would say no... But I dont understand the rules at the best of times.

[CaptnMark]

It seems to me that this system would be equivalent to Renault's weight damper and therefore "illegal".

[Fat Boy]

Just a thought. And by this I don't really have an opinion on whether or not they're running MR shocks. I guess it wouldn't suprize me either way.

They're rotary dampers. Couldn't you put a small generator in the rocker to produce the necessary electrical impulse to power the damper? Also with a fairly simple circuit and a couple rotary pots come up with a way to adjust the damper curves? I think it could probably be done. It wouldn't be externally powered, so the force (variation) on the tire contact patch would be producing all the power. The power generation by itself could be viewed as just another way to damp a suspension (creating electricity instead of heat). The MR dampers I know about use a lot more power than what (I think) you could get out of a suspension. Perhaps the MR thing is just a portion of the total damping.

Now the big question is if this give the car any sort of advantage over a car with a hydaulic only damper. Probably where it could come in very handy is tuning the frequency roll off. You could make all sorts of high pass/low pass/band pass filters. It seems like a great way to get _completely_ lost.

Next question. If it's really all that great, why wouldn't they have it on the front too?

[imaginesix]

Originally posted by Fat Boy
It seems like a great way to get _completely_ lost.

Exactly. Even putting aside the question of whether it's possible... isn't it just too complex to even try?

Since it would have to generate it's own power, the dampening effect of the electrical generator would have to be factored in to the equation. And since the current would need to be stored until it is needed, dedicated batteries would be required as well as dedicated processors.

And how could you ensure you had an adequate power supply? What if the driver doesn't run over the curbs as usual, like in a wet race? I suppose these dampers in an F1 setting would require much less juice than in road applications as there is less variation between 'full soft' and 'full hard', and there is less suspension travel so less MR fluid to charge. Maybe even 1/10th of the power required for road car applications, but is that little enough?

Then what about the control strategy? I imagine (as I am prone to do) that it would be legal to hardwire a surface map of the track into the processor so that the system could identify it's location and adjust the dampening levels accordingly. Perhaps even with enough precision to be able to tune for each bump and ripple before they are crossed. What an advantage that would be.

MR dampers could be the Jetsons to the Harmonic Damper's Flintstones.

[Greg Locock]

Go one step further, use a magnet and a coil (as in the Bose system) this can be used to generate electricity, which could be stored internally, and used later on.

This is not feasible as a self contained practical package today, but in ten years time?

As F1 degenerates into a spec series they'll either have to specify that all damping action must be directly due to viscous or shearing effects in the specified oil XYZ (tricky as there are other sources of damping) or accept that the thing called a damper is essentially a black box that provides force to the suspension system. I suppose with some instrumentation you could prove that any given device was essentially passive - if you measure the force and velocity in, if they are always within 90 degrees of each other then the thing is always absorbing power, not supplying it. Trouble is, a conventional suspension would fail that test - for instance if you were to remove all rebound damping and increase the jounce damping the car would jack up (gaining potential energy) on the rough stuff. We see the opposite - production cars suck down on rough surfaces.

[Powersteer]

Looking at the picture and discussing the article here on MRdampers, it is a little teasing that on the wing of that Ferrari is an AMD logo I would say the MR system would have huge benefits if the electronics between the left and right wheels are connected together and would react only according the both wheel loads. Anti pitch and anti-roll via hydraulic would be easy, outside the mechanical design.

[gbaker]

Originally posted by imaginesix
...Perhaps even with enough precision to be able to tune for each bump and ripple before they are crossed. What an advantage that would be....

Already been done.

[desmo]

Would there be any downside whatsoever to removing all the current rules in regards to suspension design? I'm thinking not, at this point they seem silly. With all the time (money) spent on passive systems, wouldn't it likely be cheaper to simply allow active (or whatever) once a practical orthodoxy had been established?

[zac510]

Fundamentally it isn't really all that different to a progressive rate spring, right?

We seem to unanimously like the idea which of course means they will ban it in the off season.

[Oho]

Originally posted by zac510
Fundamentally it isn't really all that different to a progressive rate spring, right?

We seem to unanimously like the idea which of course means they will ban it in the off season.

Depends quite a bit on the control strategy..

[zac510]

Originally posted by Oho


Depends quite a bit on the control strategy..

Yeah that is why I said 'fundamentally', to remove all the other factors of dubious legality.