Damage of current anti-lift rear suspension trend of F1

Mercedes Finally chose to end his on-off relationship with his rear suspension package, pressing his Formula 1 car in Emola in Hungary Grand Prix. While externally the team is not convicted for the normal recession, The revised suspension was seen as an unpleasant element In understanding and understanding its W16.

What is known that the purpose of the package was to reduce the rear axle lift under the load. The principle in doing this is that the bottom force on the rear tires remains much more stable, and holds the underbody at a stable level to generate the coherent level of the downforce.

The package was rolled out at Emola, then removed from the car in Barcelona and Monaco, and re -presented in Montreal. In the Canadian circuit, Mercedes won its first (and only, only) race of the season George RussellTurn starring in the city of Cubcois.

Andrew Showavalin, director of Mercedes’ Trackcide Engineering, said that Montreal conditions masked some stability issues that have become clear in the recent race. This certainly extinguished the decision to leave it for good, until the team decided to take it by car in Hungering.

Other teams – Ferrari And McLaren They have opted for a suspension package with the right anti-lift properties. He explained in Hungary that even designing a rear suspension package with a new gearbox (which includes hard points for suspension mounting) is naturally operated by the compromise – and the agreement is enforced by developing a new package for an existing gearbox design.

“The reality is that if you are designing a suspension and gearbox with a completely empty sheet, then this is a huge agreement where aerodynamicists want to keep all the legs, various compliances, kinematic characteristics, where there are roll centers … and in fact it is impossible to set everything where you want you,” Shovarin said.

“So the whole thing is an agreement, and this agreement is more extreme when you are doing it for an existing gearbox and an existing suspension – and the cost cap means that you can’t rip it and start again.

“The compromises we encounter can be very different for those who were near Ferrari or McClayn, so it is certainly happening in subtle expansion. McClayran has clearly made a huge success of it, but it is not difficult to see how some aspects can catch you.”

In the previous era of F1, in which the floors were largely different from the defuser in tail end, suspension layouts were largely set in stone; Generally teams work with a push-road front suspension and bridge-road rear layout.

The suspension package can be held itself, somewhat flexibility was offered on high steering angles with some subsequent designs, which to keep the front end of the car low for immediate downforce retention, but it was probably a short twist on an otherwise an otherwise an otherwise an otherwise an other-way.

However, the grassroots effects are sensitive and require frequent riding heights to work in a range of cornering conditions. Although the Lotus 88 (by modern standards) of 1981 is a primitive example of this, the demands to maintain the Venturi tunnels at a stable level were still known. In this case, ‘Twin-Chesis’ 88 had a soft spraying internal chassis, and the external chassis with tunnels was severely bounced to ensure that the ground-effect floor maintained a consistent height.

Contemporary Anti-Lift rear suspension root works for a-conversion theory to place the floor at a height of a stable ride. Developing the aerodynamic interface of the floor creates marginal benefits only at this point, and thus teams are eager to enter into deep ventures in kinametics to ensure that the floor is operated at its peak for a long time.

Showowalin reported that external factors have also affected the decisions of more venture in suspension development, especially teams are eager to soak their wind tunnel allowance with 2026 cars.

“I think this is the extent of how far you push it,” he said, “Not so much that a lot of teams could be one percent of the anti-lift in the car well, but what you could see was McLaren, it was very difficult.

“The fact is that as the rules are beginning to reduce aerodynamic benefits. You are finding small and small performance stages.

“Other facts are that teams have to transfer their wind tunnels to next year’s rules. I think naturally it means that you start looking in other areas, which you may not have discovered completely as before.

“What you can get from the dynamics of the vehicle, it is rational that towards the end of a set of rules that you start looking in areas that you do not have because the normal bread and butter of aero development start to dry.”