Active suspension closeup pics

[Zynerji]

The FW15C didn't have a push to pass button so much as a push to stall button. At the push of a button the FW15C's active suspension would reduce the ride height at the rear of the car in a straight line to stall the floor and allow the increase in speed. The active suspension mitigated the porpoising that you now see in some of the 2022 cars like the Ferrari, Haas and Mercedes. There was no trick wing system but this stall feature did allow the FW14b and 15c to run more wing which you now see on the RB18.

This is why the RB18 is so ingenious because they essentially seem to have the benefit of this old active suspension trick all the while still achieving a decent amount of downforce all without the trick suspension systems available in 1993 or 2021 and achieved with no porpoising at all as a side effect. My belief is that the underfloor design is the main reason the RB18 doesn't porpoise but it does then allow Red Bull to optimise the setting to get this top speed advantage even though I believe the power units are roughly the same on performance.

If this front bar is indeed a form of leaf spring then there is no way that the FIA could ban what is probably the oldest form of suspension in the world.

I've quoted 2 sources that state it was raised. I've seen it raise on video while the presenters commented on it. I watched on F1 decade now that I think of it.

Karun was the Williams heritage driver. Maybe someone could ask him on Twitter?

[carisi2k]

Ok. Then watch the race to see the actual use of the system? Instead, you'd rather confirmation bias to an article that agrees with you? It may not make sense to you, but the designer and team operated it that way anyway.

I got another source from 9 years ago that agrees too.

https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comme ... _the_most/

Well this article got the info wrong. It didn't raise the ride height it lowered it. Raising the ride height increases downforce and drag.

I'm flat out telling you that your info is wrong. The increase in speed comes from stalling the floor which you can't do by raising the ride height.

[Zynerji]

Ok. Then watch the race to see the actual use of the system? Instead, you'd rather confirmation bias to an article that agrees with you? It may not make sense to you, but the designer and team operated it that way anyway.

I got another source from 9 years ago that agrees too.

https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comme ... _the_most/

Well this article got the info wrong. It didn't raise the ride height it lowered it. Raising the ride height increases downforce.

Someone should ask Karun Chandock on Twitter. He would have the real answer from the team in 10 seconds...

[Zynerji]

Front wing was driver selectable in 2009. The driver could increase the front wing angle to reduce understeer when following another car. Didn't last long, IIRC, as it wasn't that good.

I might be wrong but I recollect that was introduced together with the mandatory slick tire compound change during the race to help the drivers cope with tyre variation.

Can we go back discussing the RB18 please.

Yes. I contend that the RB18 is in fact raising the suspension at speed in a reverse manner to what they did in 2021. Thus, breaking the drag of the diffusor. This may also be why the DRS flap gets hammered, as the AOA is increased while open.

[carisi2k]

I don't need to ask Karun. I'm telling you that the floor was dropped to stall the floor on the FW15C.

[Andi76]

I suggest you watch it yourself. You say your source is more trustable than the video evidence. I don't know how to help you after that.

Ugh... These downvote buttons

Like i said in my post - you probably misunderstand this feature. This was not the push-to pass button. Like i explained it makes no sense as it would result in more drag. And sorry - but there probably are not many sources that are more trustworthy than Giorgio Piola and Marc Hughes. They did not watch videos. They laid hands on these cars and stand next to them many times...and talked to the guys who built these cars. And by the way - James Hunt was already dead when the race in Silverstone 1993 took place.

Ok. Then watch the race to see the actual use of the system? Instead, you'd rather confirmation bias to an article that agrees with you? It may not make sense to you, but the designer and team operated it that way anyway.

Eehm no. Its you who' d rather confirmation bias to a dead man who told what you want to hear. This is not not the system known as the push to pass button. I explain it again why it is not and why it makes no sense. Diffuser drag is less than rearwing drag. Its simple physics. The car cannot go faster this way. You increase frontal area and the AoA of the rearwing. Thats a lot of additional drag, while you only reduce drag by a small amount by stalling the diffuser. The car will be slower. What you talk about was the FW15C increasing its rake angle. So - next to explaining to you why it is not possible and that you misunderstand this feature with another feature the car had and explaining even this one to you, i also told you what i say gets confirmed by two of the most trustworthy experts ever in F1. Who have this information from the people who designed and ran this car. And who were able to take a close look at this car and all its features personally. While your argument is insisting that designer and teams operate it the way you say because of a TV Scene that can easily be misunderstood, and a comment made by James Hunt who was already dead when this race took place.... so sorry. Unless you cannot explain to me how stalling the diffuser and increasing rear-wing drag and frontal area at the same time should result in less drag - and tell me a more reliable source than a dead man who said this - i stay with physics and trustworthy sources. And what i know about the systems of this car anyway.

[Andi76]

The FW15C didn't have a push to pass button so much as a push to stall button. At the push of a button the FW15C's active suspension would reduce the ride height at the rear of the car in a straight line to stall the floor and allow the increase in speed. The active suspension mitigated the porpoising that you now see in some of the 2022 cars like the Ferrari, Haas and Mercedes. There was no trick wing system but this stall feature did allow the FW14b and 15c to run more wing which you now see on the RB18.

This is why the RB18 is so ingenious because they essentially seem to have the benefit of this old active suspension trick all the while still achieving a decent amount of downforce all without the trick suspension systems available in 1993 or 2021 and achieved with no porpoising at all as a side effect. My belief is that the underfloor design is the main reason the RB18 doesn't porpoise but it does then allow Red Bull to optimise the setting to get this top speed advantage even though I believe the power units are roughly the same on performance.

If this front bar is indeed a form of leaf spring then there is no way that the FIA could ban what is probably the oldest form of suspension in the world.

I've quoted 2 sources that state it was raised. I've seen it raise on video while the presenters commented on it. I watched on F1 decade now that I think of it.

Karun was the Williams heritage driver. Maybe someone could ask him on Twitter?

You didn't quote two sources - one of your "quoted" sources was already dead when the race you refer to happened. James Hunt died in June 93. Silverstone was in Juli 93. But anyway - think by yourself. It makes no sense. The button, and there was one, lowered the rear of the car. Less frontal area, less rearwing AoA, stalled diffuser --> much less drag, more topspeed. The other way around you have more drag, less topspeed. The FW15c constantly changed its ride height front to rear to eliminate over or understeer. So - what you have seen on TV was either this or for more rake. But not push to pass

But i think now we should go back to the RB18.

[Zynerji]

The FW15C didn't have a push to pass button so much as a push to stall button. At the push of a button the FW15C's active suspension would reduce the ride height at the rear of the car in a straight line to stall the floor and allow the increase in speed. The active suspension mitigated the porpoising that you now see in some of the 2022 cars like the Ferrari, Haas and Mercedes. There was no trick wing system but this stall feature did allow the FW14b and 15c to run more wing which you now see on the RB18.

This is why the RB18 is so ingenious because they essentially seem to have the benefit of this old active suspension trick all the while still achieving a decent amount of downforce all without the trick suspension systems available in 1993 or 2021 and achieved with no porpoising at all as a side effect. My belief is that the underfloor design is the main reason the RB18 doesn't porpoise but it does then allow Red Bull to optimise the setting to get this top speed advantage even though I believe the power units are roughly the same on performance.

If this front bar is indeed a form of leaf spring then there is no way that the FIA could ban what is probably the oldest form of suspension in the world.

I've quoted 2 sources that state it was raised. I've seen it raise on video while the presenters commented on it. I watched on F1 decade now that I think of it.

Karun was the Williams heritage driver. Maybe someone could ask him on Twitter?

You didn't quote two sources - one of your "quoted" sources was already dead when the race you refer to happened. James Hunt died in June 93. Silverstone was in Juli 93. But anyway - think by yourself. It makes no sense. The button, and there was one, lowered the rear of the car. Less frontal area, less rearwing AoA, stalled diffuser --> much less drag, more topspeed. The other way around you have more drag, less topspeed. The FW15c constantly changed its ride height front to rear to eliminate over or understeer. So - what you have seen on TV was either this or for more rake. But not push to pass

But i think now we should go back to the RB18.

Bro. Just because it makes no sense to you doesn't mean it wasn't done. I literally give zero care to what you "think". I only care what you can "prove". I've quoted 2 articles that agree with me. That's more valuable to the question than your "feeling".

I thought this was s technical forum, not an "I don't get it, so I'll change history to match my incompetence" meet up.

[Zynerji]

I don't need to ask Karun. I'm telling you that the floor was dropped to stall the floor on the FW15C.

Did you program it yourself? Drive it a few times? If you are OG Williams mechanic, maybe your "telling me" might gain a bit of weight beyond the nothing it is currently.

[Andi76]

I've quoted 2 sources that state it was raised. I've seen it raise on video while the presenters commented on it. I watched on F1 decade now that I think of it.

Karun was the Williams heritage driver. Maybe someone could ask him on Twitter?

You didn't quote two sources - one of your "quoted" sources was already dead when the race you refer to happened. James Hunt died in June 93. Silverstone was in Juli 93. But anyway - think by yourself. It makes no sense. The button, and there was one, lowered the rear of the car. Less frontal area, less rearwing AoA, stalled diffuser --> much less drag, more topspeed. The other way around you have more drag, less topspeed. The FW15c constantly changed its ride height front to rear to eliminate over or understeer. So - what you have seen on TV was either this or for more rake. But not push to pass

But i think now we should go back to the RB18.

Bro. Just because it makes no sense to you doesn't mean it wasn't done. I literally give zero care to what you "think". I only care what you can "prove". I've quoted 2 articles that agree with me. That's more valuable to the question than your "feeling".

I thought this was s technical forum, not an "I don't get it, so I'll change history to match my incompetence" meet up.

Ok. Just to make sure:

So you call me, Giorgio Piola and Marc Hughes and carisi2k incompetent? And i also have to add Paddy Lowe, who was the engineer who developed the electronics for this car. You call all of us incompetent? And something you watched on a video and you maybe misinterpreted(as there were many reasons why the FW15 raised its rear) and someone you do not know(like i said - Hunt was already dead)know more valueable? Is that correct? Are you seriously doing that?

I advise you to take a look at the picture of the floor of the Red Bull on this page. Look who has drawn it. The same one who publishes books with technical analyses about F1 cars for many decades and who has access to the cars. Giorgio Piola. So i ask you again - incompetent? Are you serious?

And yes this is a technical forum. And in a technical forum technical arguements count. You obviously are not able to do that, but call other people who can incompetent. I would rather call someone who cannot explain how a system works incompetent. But anyway - this is a technical forum, so please explain "history" to us and tell us how this system reduced drag by stalling the diffuser while increasing frontal area and rearwing AoA at the same time. I am sure many of us are very interested how its possible to change physics. So before you get personal and zynical (what looks like - "i cannot explain and i am not able to argue, so l am getting personal and abusive), i would suggest to provide arguements and a technical explaination rather than constantly calling a possibly misinterpreted video and an unknown source "valueable" only. I assume next to the technical worth if the content, your approach is also a reason for why your posts got downvoted.

[kalinka]

You didn't quote two sources - one of your "quoted" sources was already dead when the race you refer to happened. James Hunt died in June 93. Silverstone was in Juli 93. But anyway - think by yourself. It makes no sense. The button, and there was one, lowered the rear of the car. Less frontal area, less rearwing AoA, stalled diffuser --> much less drag, more topspeed. The other way around you have more drag, less topspeed. The FW15c constantly changed its ride height front to rear to eliminate over or understeer. So - what you have seen on TV was either this or for more rake. But not push to pass

But i think now we should go back to the RB18.

Bro. Just because it makes no sense to you doesn't mean it wasn't done. I literally give zero care to what you "think". I only care what you can "prove". I've quoted 2 articles that agree with me. That's more valuable to the question than your "feeling".

I thought this was s technical forum, not an "I don't get it, so I'll change history to match my incompetence" meet up.

Ok. Just to make sure:

So you call me, Giorgio Piola and Marc Hughes and carisi2k incompetent? And i also have to add Paddy Lowe, who was the engineer who developed the electronics for this car. You call all of us incompetent? And something you watched on a video and you maybe misinterpreted(as there were many reasons why the FW15 raised its rear) and someone you do not know(like i said - Hunt was already dead)know more valueable? Is that correct? Are you seriously doing that?

I advise you to take a look at the picture of the floor of the Red Bull on this page. Look who has drawn it. The same one who publishes books with technical analyses about F1 cars for many decades and who has access to the cars. Giorgio Piola. So i ask you again - incompetent? Are you serious?

And yes this is a technical forum. And in a technical forum technical arguements count. You obviously are not able to do that, but call other people who can incompetent. I would rather call someone who cannot explain how a system works incompetent. But anyway - this is a technical forum, so please explain "history" to us and tell us how this system reduced drag by stalling the diffuser while increasing frontal area and rearwing AoA at the same time. I am sure many of us are very interested how its possible to change physics. So before you get personal and zynical (what looks like - "i cannot explain and i am not able to argue, so l am getting personal and abusive), i would suggest to provide arguements and a technical explaination rather than constantly calling a possibly misinterpreted video and an unknown source "valueable" only. I assume next to the technical worth if the content, your approach is also a reason for why your posts got downvoted.

Driver61 agrees with you. From 6:30 >
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRB9T2ACPRI

[Andi76]

Bro. Just because it makes no sense to you doesn't mean it wasn't done. I literally give zero care to what you "think". I only care what you can "prove". I've quoted 2 articles that agree with me. That's more valuable to the question than your "feeling".

I thought this was s technical forum, not an "I don't get it, so I'll change history to match my incompetence" meet up.

Ok. Just to make sure:

So you call me, Giorgio Piola and Marc Hughes and carisi2k incompetent? And i also have to add Paddy Lowe, who was the engineer who developed the electronics for this car. You call all of us incompetent? And something you watched on a video and you maybe misinterpreted(as there were many reasons why the FW15 raised its rear) and someone you do not know(like i said - Hunt was already dead)know more valueable? Is that correct? Are you seriously doing that?

I advise you to take a look at the picture of the floor of the Red Bull on this page. Look who has drawn it. The same one who publishes books with technical analyses about F1 cars for many decades and who has access to the cars. Giorgio Piola. So i ask you again - incompetent? Are you serious?

And yes this is a technical forum. And in a technical forum technical arguements count. You obviously are not able to do that, but call other people who can incompetent. I would rather call someone who cannot explain how a system works incompetent. But anyway - this is a technical forum, so please explain "history" to us and tell us how this system reduced drag by stalling the diffuser while increasing frontal area and rearwing AoA at the same time. I am sure many of us are very interested how its possible to change physics. So before you get personal and zynical (what looks like - "i cannot explain and i am not able to argue, so l am getting personal and abusive), i would suggest to provide arguements and a technical explaination rather than constantly calling a possibly misinterpreted video and an unknown source "valueable" only. I assume next to the technical worth if the content, your approach is also a reason for why your posts got downvoted.

Driver61 agrees with you. From 6:30 >
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRB9T2ACPRI

And Scott has actually driven this car! But maybe he is also incompetent As is the one who developed this system, Paddy Lowe. As is Giorgio Piola and Marc Hughes who laid hands on this car. And maybe a driver who has driven this car, an engineer who has built that car and two experts who laid their hands on this car give less valueable informations about a car that an interpretation of a Video by dead person and guy who who probably watched this car for the first time. And i almost forgot - an random F1 Fan on reedit. Who knows? Sorry for me now being a little bit sarcastic...

And sorry for being off topic again, guys. Lets finally go back to the RB18