BBC: "Max Verstappen and George Russell want F1 cars raised" (to reduce bottoming out) This raises interesting questions: Can on-track ride heights be effectively policed, and should minimum ride heights be used to control speeds?

[u/fivewheelpitstop]

https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/68491352

The 2023 increase in floor height was the minimum height of the contoured portion of the floor, relative to a "reference plane," not the height of the plank; even without porpoising, cars bottom out on track, hurting the drivers.

So far as I know, the only way the FIA hasn't tried any kind of quantified minimum ride height since the ban on skirts, before which the FIA and teams played cat-and-mouse (e.g., cockpit-adjustable hydraulics raising and lowering the car), with the mid-1994 introduction of the plank simultaneously raising the cars and being a means of policing on-track ride heights (by way of measuring plank wear). But suspension is now extremely regulated and, even if it wasn't, the cars have ride height sensors - can the FIA now effectively police a gap to the lowest point on the car, not just physical wear from contact with the track?

If so, should minimum ride heights be used to control speeds? In 1998, car widths were reduced, both decreasing surface area for aerodynamics and increasing weight transfer. Increased ride heights would reduce downforce from the floor, decrease ride height sensitivity (the difference between maximum and minimum ride height would be proportionally smaller), and increase weight transfer (by raising the center of mass).

[u/AutoModerator]

We remind everyone that this is a sub for technical discussions.

If you are new to the sub, please make time to read our rules and comment etiquette post.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/GaryGiesel]

It’s extremely hard to measure ride heights reliably on the cars; this is one of the things that is really hard to grasp when watching from the outside. You only know things as well as you can measure them and when we can’t measure them reliably for performance reasons you can bet that we definitely won’t be able to measure them reliably for regulatory reasons. Indirect measurements like moving the plank down would be much more effective at enforcing effective ride height minima

[u/therealdilbert → u/GaryGiesel]

don't even need to move the plank, just make it wear easier, change the skid blocks, change the limits measurement points etc.

[u/fivewheelpitstop → u/GaryGiesel]

Interesting - do you know why the ride height sensors are so noisy? For optical measurements (assuming those are the sensors you're referring to), I'm not sure what would introduce noise, as opposed to systematic error, other than irregularities in the track surface.

I wonder if the plank material could be replaced with foam, so that it's drastically less abrasion resistant and has some level of impact absorption, or if it would be too difficult to find a foam that doesn't chip away in inconsistent chunks. But perhaps just removing the skid blocks would be enough - it seems kind of silly that the cars have both the plank AND skid blocks, anyway. (And the FIA could literally make that change overnight, if the drivers wanted less bottoming out ASAP.) Thanks.

[u/Montjo17 → u/fivewheelpitstop]

The track surface is not smooth - if using an optical sensor that measured the height beneath it perfectly, you'd get variation on the order of 10mm+. That alone makes it extremely difficult to quantify - where on the car (which is constantly shifting in attidue!) are you comparing to where on the ground?

[u/fivewheelpitstop → u/Montjo17]

Well, yes, I said "other than irregularities in the track surface." Where are you getting 10mm+?

[u/Montjo17 → u/fivewheelpitstop]

You can't just dismiss the biggest problem with accurately measuring ride height and then ask why it's hard to measure ride height

[u/fivewheelpitstop → u/Montjo17]

But where did you get the 10mm+ number?

[u/Montjo17 → u/fivewheelpitstop]

I pulled it out my ass from having spent a lot of time walking around race tracks. The surface of a track varies om the order of 10s of millimetres

[u/Spiderbanana → u/GaryGiesel]

Install hard concrete 3mm plots on straight lines in the middle of the racing line.

Whoever runs too low immediately destroys their car running over it.

[u/Huntyr09 → u/Spiderbanana]

Wouldn't that also destroy the tires even if the plank clears the bumps? I can't imagine the bumps would be nice to the spots that hit them.

[u/notafamous → u/Huntyr09]

You could put them where in the middle of the racing line, as the tires usually roll on the borders, and pray that nobody goes out of the racing line, what could go wrong?

Edit: A LOT could go wrong, it's was a joke

[u/PrescriptionCocaine → u/notafamous]

Seems like a great way to turn grand prix into a parade. Overtake at the risk of exploding your tire instantly.

[u/notafamous → u/PrescriptionCocaine]

Sure do and I don't think it would improve racing in any way, thought it was clear that it was a joke, I'll update.

[u/watatweest]

Maybe the FIA should require accelerometers that measure vertical acceleration load on the chassis at the driver’s position over the course of the race?

The max vertical load and number of occurrences allowed over that vertical load would be specified by the FIA and be based on what would medically be acceptable

Any team exceeding the number of occurrences over the max vertical load during the race would be in violation

This would allow teams freedom to do what they want setup-wise while ensuring the drivers aren’t being tortured physically.

[u/fivewheelpitstop → u/watatweest]

They used a similar measurement for porpoising, in 2022, so I wouldn't be surprised if it's considered.

[u/watatweest → u/fivewheelpitstop]

Interesting - I wasn’t aware that there was already a similar measurement being taken before, but that makes sense, especially considering how bad porpoising was

[u/HarryNohara]

I guess they could do a load test on multiple parts of the car, with the suspension set at its softest configuration. If it touches the ground, a car could be deemed illegal.

It likely still wouldn't ban out bottoming, but it would force teams to run the cars less low.

[u/therealdilbert → u/HarryNohara]

and the teams would in no time find away around the test, that's what is brilliant about the plank instead of a ride height test. The race becomes the test, plank worn too much? you must have run too low and are disqualified

[u/[deleted]]

See 1981 F1 season. Or mandate spec active suspension with lower ride height set to whatever the rule is.

[u/Newbie-74]

Lower the plank but put it on springs. Make the whole thing a single component controlled by the FIA.

The plank will wear before the car bottoms out.

[u/Accurate-Mistake-815]

Remove the planks completely If they run too low and destroy the car then so be it

That’s what Bernie would say…. Probably

[u/stellarinterstitium]

Yes, absolutely. Teams will already have ride height sensors on the cars. They just need to add it to the telemetry. Random checks post race indicating min heights below regulations are disqualified, just like with fuel samples.

[u/GaryGiesel → u/stellarinterstitium]

Absolutely impossible to rely on sensors for regulatory matters. They’re insanely unreliable and noisy. And also generally removed for quali and the race

[u/fivewheelpitstop → u/GaryGiesel]

Absolutely impossible to rely on sensors for regulatory matters. They’re insanely unreliable and noisy. And also generally removed for quali and the race

To clarify, do you consider a subset of sensors (e.g., ride height) insufficiently precise and accurate for regulatory matters, or do you have more of a general objection to on-board sensors being used for regulatory matters? If the latter, why? Fuel-flow (with one suspected but not publicly proven exception), and tire pressure sensors (with a notable attempt to cheat being caught and reported by the team's car supplier) are used in multiple championships, with only those two failures reaching my attention in the five years I've been consistently following motorsport. (Not that I'd necessarily learn about all examples like this.) IMSA LMDh even uses torque sensors at the half-shafts, combined with RPM logs) to ensure the momentary combined ICE and MGU power output and overall energy expenditure over a stint (they have really convoluted rules for this that seem to be and attempt to better incorporate MGU utilization in BOP, rather than only adjusting ICE fuel capacity) don't exceed their respective caps.

Thanks! (Also, someone else speculated you're at McLaren, in which case, congrats on the great Australian GP result!)

[u/turbodeezel → u/stellarinterstitium]

That’s what happened to Lewis in Austin 2023… wore out the plank too much because ride height was too low

[u/Newbie-74]

Lower the plank but put it on springs. Make the whole thing a single component controlled by the FIA.

The plank will wear before the car bottoms out.

[u/Silver996C2]

IndyCar measure plank wear and DQ cars with too much wear.

[u/BadIdea-21 → u/Silver996C2]

Isn't that exactly why Lewis and Charles were DQ'd last year in COTA?