The formula 1 J-damper - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: hamster_nz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 23, 2025, 10:58:21 pm
content: Came across this video, and thought it might be of interest to others.If I under stand correctly, it is a "two terminal" mechanical device that that produces a force that is opposite to and proportional to an acceleration, so a mechanical analogy to an inductor.

author: SteveThackery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 23, 2025, 11:50:52 pm
content: Quote from: hamster_nz on July 23, 2025, 10:58:21 pmYes. But I remain puzzled by how that could be useful in a car suspension. Springs, yes. Dampers, yes. But the "inerter" seems to do the opposite of the valving in a damper (ie a damper has valves which vary the viscous resistance with the applied force,reducingit when the wheel is subjected to a strong acceleration force). This makes the damper temporarily less stiff when going over a big bump, thus transmitting less disturbance to the car body. The valve then closes in order that the damper reverts to damping out any subsequent oscillations of the body. The "inerter" appears to do the exact opposite. Colour me puzzled.

author: cunningfellow
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 24, 2025, 01:42:30 am
content: is it that it gives you an L so you have RLC rather than just RC

author: wilfred
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 24, 2025, 06:45:17 am
content: I got that recommendation too. We're all a part of the algorithm now. Although I had been recently watching some F1 videos. so I wasn't surprised. It was an interesting video. Not sure it needed to be quite as long as it was.

author: brucehoult
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 24, 2025, 07:26:34 am
content: I got it too, a few days ago.But we can't all be getting ALL the same recommendations. I bet you aren't suddenly getting a ton of SVG videos (hamster_nz might be). I'm sure you're not all getting the same chess and risk and sailing and off-grid power and ukraine war and Mach loop/RIAT and gliding and music reaction videos I get recommended.But ... maybe some of you have had this one?

author: hans
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 24, 2025, 08:39:01 am
content: Quote from: cunningfellow on July 24, 2025, 01:42:30 amHaving partially watched the video and wikipedia article on inerter/J-damperit said was discovered because the classical electrical/mechanical analogy often failed to point out that mass analogy should be referenced to 'ground'. So they are not quite 2 terminal devices, while capacitors are. The inerter is analogous to a capacitor. It can "dampen" acceleration forces put onto it, analogous to how a regular damper (resistor) will dampen velocity.Its basically a flywheel attached to a gear mechanism. The flywheel is a rotating mass. The gear ratio amplifies it in which the resulting mass is call the "inertance". Apparently the amplification ratio for the inertance is quadratic, so that makes it possible to upscale a 100gr mass with 2 simple gear ratios up to 250kg (as shown by the Meccano set).I think one of the major appeals is that it can give the characteristics of a very high mass "body" while weighing very very little.The J-damper has been banned in 2022/2023 for budget limit reasons, and prof Smith said cars were showing quite bad stability problems (porpoising anyone?) with the modern ground effect cars.

author: eutectique
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 24, 2025, 09:18:09 am
content: Quote from: brucehoult on July 24, 2025, 07:26:34 amYes, got it recommended too a couple of weeks back.

author: Berni
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 24, 2025, 09:35:24 am
content: Youtube algorithms tend to discover "user groups" that show the most watch time in certain topics. When a uploaded video is categorized to fit into one of your groups then the video is suggested on the front page. So in general if you watch science youtubers you will likley get suggested this videos. There is a also a video about a youtuber constructing a similar graph of youtube channels by using the API to scrape who subscribes to who and them using graph theory algorithms to find the most tightly connected parts, they formed clear clusters around various topics. How exactly youtubes algorithms work is a closely guarded secret but it is something along these lines.But yeah the video is way too long for what they are explaining.This is just a way of multiplying the inertia of something, much like for example the capacitance multiplier circuit (imitates the behavior of a big capacitor using a small capacitor):https://www.falstad.com/circuit/e-capmult.htmlThe smart engineers of F1 can use al sorts of tiny tricks to squeeze out a slight advantage and id say this was just another tool in their toolbelt for tuning how the suspension behaves. Similarly regular mass dampers were used to stabilize the suspension with a mass on a spring. The combination of the mass, spring and piston create a RLC circuit that can be tuned for a certain frequency. If you have an instability at that frequency it could help suck away the kinetic energy and keep it from actually becoming unstable.However most of the reasoning behind F1 rules are politics (especially now that teams themselves also vote on the decisions of how F1 is run). If enough people vote against a technology then they will make up some reason for why it is bad and should be banned.

author: hans
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 24, 2025, 10:38:38 am
content: Well, any video is usually not the best condensed format of conveying information. But it can be helpful.But yes, different optimization criteria.F1 has different stakeholders. The FIA wants to have a fair sport (bound by technical regulations), and also one that pushes for entertainment (a slight touch of equity of cars performance). While the teams want to optimize development of lap time, which is in relation to other teams. This means teams will protest or ask for clarifications from the FIA when it suits them, while keeping their mouth shut about about their own inventions (technical clarifications that are concluded to be legal are not broadcast to other teams, while illegal verdicts are).Politics politics politics..Meanwhile mainstream cars are optimized for cost. There are plenty of people that will have a decent flashy car (Ford ST, VW GTI, BMWs, Audis, etc.) but still find the suspension to be lacking. Some of these cars are sprung so hard to optimize handling that they are backbreaking over speedbumps. There are spring/damper kits with slow/fast rebound settings, among other suspension bushings that can severely improve this. But of course those upgrades cost more $$, while most people will buy a flashy car on looks, BHP and perhaps SO approval.I still love F1 for the cheeky character it has. This video talked about how prof Smith educated Mclaren about the inerter, which they researched for a while, and once a prototype was ready fitted on the car next race. Then in a next meeting, they were discussing some information on their now called "J-damper", where the replaced the units of 'kg' with "Zogs" to obfuscate the information. F1 is a career industry on its own, people circulate all the time, so I imagine a lot of works on a need to know basis..

author: SteveThackery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 24, 2025, 11:39:33 am
content: Quote from: cunningfellow on July 24, 2025, 01:42:30 amIndeed, but why, exactly, is that better?We need to be careful with analogies. There isn't a simple electrical analogy for a car suspension damper. The nearest I can think of is a resistor with a bidirectional zener across it.

author: Fraser
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 24, 2025, 12:14:41 pm
content: I was shown that video by the algorithm as well. It was an interesting watch and I was not only interested in the operation of the J Damper but also the “industrial espionage” aspects of the back story. Image getting your hands on some important F1 component and not being able to understand what it is and how it truly works ! 🤣 Similar happened when Russia stole plans to the Concord and did not understand the critical operation of the engine air intake design.Whilst the J damper is not the most interesting of mechanical components in terms of its appearance, it obviously provided an advantage to those who use it.

author: Berni
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 24, 2025, 12:19:39 pm
content: The electrical equivalent can vary depending on what you map the voltage and current onto. Not that it is a good way to model a cars suspension, but with people who understand how circuits work the analogy can help understand how it works.The main job of shock absorbers is to dissipate the energy to heat so that it doesn't keep cycling between the spring and mass like a LC circuit does.Since the shock absorber only does something when moving you could model it like a series RC (like the popular "Zobel network" used to make power amplifiers more stable). Only AC voltage passes current trough the capacitor and ends up going trough the resistor to dissipate it into heat.Another possible analogy might be turning the L into a transformer with a shorted secondary. Only AC current makes it across into the secondary where it pushes a current trough the winding resistance and turns it into heat. This is also a lot how EMI ferrite beads work, they are a inductor with a magnetic core that is horribly lossy on purpose, so DC currents only see the DC resistance of the coil, but AC currents starts inductively heating the core to dissipate the energy (similar to a transformer with a resistor across the secondary).

author: iMo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 24, 2025, 12:58:24 pm
content: - When talking car racing - I've seen a bunch of YT videos on the electric RC cars speed racing (in UK) recently. The guys are coping with following problem - they are desperately looking for a material for their tires. There is today none material suitable to withstand a single sprint (say 200-300m?? long). The speed of the RC cars today is 200+ mph (official record is 218mph, and they target much more), the wheels' rpm is like 30000++. The diameter of their wheels is 91-100mm and the tires are currently made of a light foam aprox 2-3mm thick (a rubber - with kevlar or without - disintegrates at aprox 15-20k rpm)..PS: they experiment with dampers too..

author: wilfred
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 24, 2025, 02:10:02 pm
content: Quote from: brucehoult on July 24, 2025, 07:26:34 amI was watching SVG. I don't think because he's a kiwi really factored into it.

author: hans
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 24, 2025, 03:15:29 pm
content: Quote from: Fraser on July 24, 2025, 12:14:41 pmThere is not a single cell in my body that believes this "play dumb" Renault explanation. Especially not when Briatore was head of that team. That man was willing to intentionally crash one of its own cars for strategic advantage, so they could hand a win to their preferential driver. This only leaked out when said crashed driver (Piquet jr) spoke up after he was thrown out of the team anyway. In other words: more politics.If a court asks how something went or how you think it went, why not give an answer thats believable and you can get away with, all for own gain. It could very well be a case of 'play dumb' to make it appear they have no sporting advantage from it, and thus escape penalties.In real life, this is analogous to people saying sorry not for what they have done, but for being caught.When we as engineers are asked to answer how something works, our curiosity kicks in and we want to get things right. Not to downplay Smith's work on the theoretical foundation, but in principle how this J-damper works is quite simple. Its a rotating mass that resists acceleration.How the rest of F1 operates is through obfuscation, playing games, and walking at the edge (or slightly over) what is allowed by the sporting and technical regulations.

author: brucehoult
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 25, 2025, 01:44:15 am
content: Quote from: hans on July 24, 2025, 03:15:29 pmThese days it is totally accepted to sacrifice the race of one driver to help the other, via pit stop strategy, instructing drivers to swap positions, instructing one driver to deliberately go slowly to obstruct their rivals. Deliberately crashing to bring out a safety car is worse in some way, but not all THAT much. There are several drivers who have deliberately crashed in quali while having provisional pole to prevent rivals from setting a better time.These days Piquet wouldn't even have to crash, just stop the car beside the track in an "unsafe position".

author: langwadt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 25, 2025, 02:01:13 am
content: Quote from: brucehoult on July 25, 2025, 01:44:15 amthen he would need a good plausible explanation why and moving an intact car is usually much fasterintentionally crashing is definitely much worse, and several races series have rules where if you cause a red flag in qualifying you start at the back and if you cause a yellow you lose your fastest lap(s)it's a team sport so there's not wrong about swapping positions, and not letting someone overtake is just racing (as long as you don't break the rules to keep them behind)

author: langwadt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 25, 2025, 02:09:43 am
content: Quote from: Berni on July 24, 2025, 09:35:24 amoften because if they allow X everyone will have to spend money developing X, and once every has X it no longer makes a difference and was just wasted money.pretty much all racing series (except maybe F1) have collapsed because they got popular and budgets to be competitive exploded end then everyone left

author: brucehoult
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 25, 2025, 02:44:39 am
content: Quote from: langwadt on July 25, 2025, 02:09:43 amPresumably you mean "formula" series as opposed to "one design" series.You really only have F1, WRC, and WEC as proper formula series now. F2, F3, FE have spec chassis and powertrain (except FE where the battery is spec but the powertrain is custom). IndyCar, NASCAR, Supercars are basically nearly fully spec.In sailing you've pretty much only got America's Cup and the Volvo round-the-world as formula classes. Everything else ffrom SailGP to Olympic classes to Optimists are one-design.What annoys me is people who want to turn F1 or AC into one-design classes "so the best drivers/sailers win". They can FOAD. If they want one-design then there is already EVERYTHING ELSE.

author: langwadt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 25, 2025, 03:09:52 am
content: Quote from: brucehoult on July 25, 2025, 02:44:39 amWRC is Rally1 now and many parts are spec parts and they are not road car based except in looksWEC has "balance of performance", the cars have fit in a specified performance windows and the rest will (theoretically) be made up by giving different teams more/less power/weight/energyracing with open rules just doesn't work very long, as soon as it gets popular manufacturers start throwing money at it until the budgets get so huge they all decide it is not worth it and leave

author: hans
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 25, 2025, 07:53:45 am
content: Quote from: brucehoult on July 25, 2025, 01:44:15 amRussell was frustrated this year at Monaco being stuck for many laps behind a very slow car. He spoke out on the radio and ended up making an illegal pass. Instead of a regular 5s penalty for offtrack advantage, he got a drive through instead.Intent is part of the penalty. I'm sure if they would find intent in car B helping car A to a podium or win, that stewards wouldn't shy away from a team+driver DSQ.I do get your point in team orders, etc. It was controversial in 00s but from a team's perspective, but it makes sense to maximize constructors points if you can instruct 1 car to not hold up the other due to strategy. Or if 1 driver has a chance for the drivers title, etc.However, intentional crashing is more like insider trading. You know on which lap or codeword this is supposed to happen. By playing the rules with safety cars etc. you're employing a strategy only reserved for you, which is unfair and unjust to say the least.Quote from: brucehoult on July 25, 2025, 02:44:39 amAgreedF1's beauty is in the rapid development, the team's politics and a field of the fastest cars battling it out.Its both an engineering and racing driver sport.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 25, 2025, 04:28:08 pm
content: Quote from: SteveThackery on July 23, 2025, 11:50:52 pmMy guess (and it is a pure guess) is that that the damper will cause a more stiff response for a larger bump, causing the chassis to lift and the tire to loose downward force. The inerter would allow for more give once it starts to compress. Seems like it would improve traction under some road conditions.

author: SteveThackery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 25, 2025, 09:46:25 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on July 25, 2025, 04:28:08 pmMaybe so, although that scenario is exactly what the pressure relief (blow-off) valves in dampers do. They are usually implemented as a spring-loaded valve or a shim stack. In normal operation they are usually closed (or partially open), but under extreme compression or extension forces they open, allowing the damping fluid to bypass the usual calibrated restriction, thus temporarily reducing the damping effect and transmitting less of the shock to the vehicle.I think we don't have the full story. I think the inerters are not usedinsteadof the dampers, but in some combination which wasn't made clear in the video.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 25, 2025, 11:24:26 pm
content: Quote from: SteveThackery on July 25, 2025, 09:46:25 pmSeems like it would unload the wheel. A step function at any high speed seems like it would be a bad thing.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 01:55:43 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on July 25, 2025, 04:28:08 pmIf you listen to the professor carefully, you'll hear him mentioning 'impedance matching'. The inerter works like a capacitor so suddenly you can create RLC filters (for example with sharp notches) instead of just RL filters for a suspension system. The video also mentions porpoising (suspension oscillations) which occured in some F1 cars when the J-damper was banned.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 03:40:10 pm
content: There are a lot of papers about it free for viewing.QuoteQuotehttps://www.racecar-engineering.com/articles/f1/understanding-the-j-damper/Quotehttps://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/secrets-of-the-inerter-revealed

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 04:00:50 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on July 26, 2025, 03:40:10 pmThis is what you'd call mumbo-jumbo.Sounds more like crystal ball suspension.

author: SteveThackery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 04:00:59 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on July 26, 2025, 01:55:43 pmYes, that's the argument made up the thread, but I still can't get it to work in my head.It is stated that the inerter works like a capacitor. But that seems completely wrong to me. Surely inertia is the mechanical equivalent of inductance. An inductor does to electrical current what the inerter does to mechanical motion. Both resist rapid changes in current/motion, both integrate the emf/mechanical force applied, both have the ability to create a negative-going emf/mechanical force when the positive emf/mechanical force is removed.So it looks perfectly clear to me that an inerter is the mechanical analogue of an inductor. Obviously I'm completely wrong: the professor says so. So can someone explain how something with mechanical inertia is equivalent to a capacitor?EDIT: It seems clear to me that the mechanical equivalent of a capacitor is a spring. When an emf/force is applied a flow of current /motion occurs until the emf/force from the charged capacitor/compressed spring equals the driving emf/force. Removing the charging force allows the capacitor to discharge / allows the spring to expand.

author: SteveThackery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 04:02:39 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on July 26, 2025, 04:00:50 pmAbsolutely! Itcannotbe seen how it will stabilise load variations in that hand-wavey explanation.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 04:07:17 pm
content: Quote from: SteveThackery on July 26, 2025, 04:00:59 pmLook at the mathematical analogies at 11:46 in the video.

author: SteveThackery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 04:19:19 pm
content: Take a look at this table from a little before 11:46.Surely velocity and force are the wrong way round? A mechanical force is appliedacrosssomething - like the two ends of a spring, or the two ends of the inerter. If you apply a force to only one end of something it skitters away across the table.Intuitively, force must be in the same column as voltage and pressure. They are analogous, are they not?

author: langwadt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 04:29:00 pm
content: https://lpsa.swarthmore.edu/Analogs/ElectricalMechanicalAnalogs.html

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 04:38:11 pm
content: think about it voltage tells you nothing of current so if you say the river has has a 10m/s velocity its like voltage because you don't know if its a stream or the missisipi, you just know that if you throw a bottle in there it should move 10 meters in 1 second

author: SteveThackery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 04:42:42 pm
content: Quote from: hamster_nz on July 23, 2025, 10:58:21 pmThe OP said what I think: the inerter is the analogue of an inductor, not a capacitor, so I'm in good company!Look at this, from 11:46...The first row seems wrong. It is normal to say the effect is proportional to the cause. The top left square says exactly that: the current is proportional to the voltage across the resistor. But the top right square is the wrong way round. It should say the relative velocity (the result) is proportional to the force across the damper (the cause).The second row seems wrong in a different way. The left square says the current is proportional to theintegralof the voltage across the inductor, which is correct, but the right square says that the force from a spring is proportional to the degree of compression. Both these statements are correct, butthey are not analogous. The right square is pure proportionality; the left hand square involves theintegralof the applied force.I'm not arguing with the proff's claims. But I think there is something very wrong with theexplanationfrom the film maker.Or more likely I'm too dumb to understand the explanation! 😅

author: SteveThackery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 04:47:28 pm
content: Quote from: langwadt on July 26, 2025, 04:29:00 pmNow that's confusing, because the rightmost column is what I'm saying, and the middle column is what the video says!

author: Berni
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 04:49:54 pm
content: Yep most things in physics come in such pairs like voltage and current do in electrical.But the two quantities in the pair are pretty much equivalent, there is no fundamental property that one has over the other. So when you map these between the different worlds of electrical, mechanical, hydraulic..etc there is no right and wrong way around, you can swap what maps to what and it all still works. So we just pick the one that makes more sense in that situation. So for hydraulics it makes sense to map amps and flow rate together since you could imagine the little molecules of liquid running around as being electrons running around a circuit.In electrical you could swap voltage and current around and measure potential in Amps and flow in Volts. The equations still look the same except that Inductance and Capacitance seam to be doing the opposite thing, but if you swap the equations for those around then it makes sense again (since everything now is on the basis of conductance rather than resistance). Since other systems in physics follow the same kind of equations you can swap those around too as long as you swap everything appropriately.This is the beautiful thing about physics how the same equations seam to work in all of these systems despite how different they may seam. So if you know circuit analysis and can map a physical system into amps and volts then you can use all the same circuit analysis tricks and it just all magically works.

author: hans
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 04:50:31 pm
content: Intuitively, from a point of electrical resistance, I think you're right.High force / low velocity = high resistance.But I think their definition is like this because its desirable to have the equivalence of Kirchhoff current law in forces. The net force (or otherwise current) from a node is simply the summation of all forces (vectors). Doing this for voltages becomes a lot more complicated.Also velocity is only relative to other bodies or a reference point (much like we use ground). This was also the argument made why a mass is not a pure capacitor: its reference point is supposed to be ground. I think it has to do with how relative velocities would interact with center of gravities, and since inerters have a mass rotating around its own center of gravity, that is perhaps not a problem. But I could be totally mistaken.These equatable laws may still need some work to translate 3-dimensional (complex) mechanical space into 1-dimensional (complex) electrical space. You can probably replace everything with vectors and matrices, or perhaps work something out with superposition, but things get a bit tricky when dealing with the various divisions that pop up..

author: SteveThackery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 04:56:56 pm
content: Quote from: coppercone2 on July 26, 2025, 04:38:11 pmBut isn't it equally true to say that current tells you nothing of voltage? Both statements are true because they are missing the third element: resistance. When the resistance is known, current tells you everything about voltage, and vice versa.Or not! 🫤

author: johansen
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 05:00:07 pm
content: Which mechanical model works best to model a ram pump as an electrical circuit?A ram pump works by letting a large amount of water flow down a pipe where a check valve suddenly snaps shut, the pressure spike as a result of the inertia and momentum of the moving water, forces open a valve which bleeds off part of the water and it flows up the pipe.To me, that's a boost converter. pressure is voltage, flow rate is amps, inertia is inductance.(Initially the flow through the relief valve equals the flow in the pipe minus the energy transferred into the pipe itself expanding with the water pressure, and this loss can be significant, it is effectively an impedance miss match resulting in a reflected wave, which is used to open the valve which allows the water to start flowing again and building up velocity.)As for an inerter... whats to prevent a F1 team from concealing it inside a shock absorber? One of their Inerter designs was a hydraulic cylinder with a long spiral path for the fluid to flow back into itself, and they filled it with mercury LOL.How would the rules dictate how long the hydraulic lines on the shock absorbers are allowed to be? you could wrap them around the car to get the dampening and kinetic energy storage you want.

author: SteveThackery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 05:03:30 pm
content: Quote from: Berni on July 26, 2025, 04:49:54 pmThank you, Berni.I was right - I am too dumb to understand it, because the above paragraph makes no sense at all to me, even though it's bound to be right because Berni wrote it.Forget about explaining it to me, guys - the problem is with me. I'll take it offline and give it a good thinking about.

author: SteveThackery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 05:06:45 pm
content: Quote from: johansen on July 26, 2025, 05:00:07 pmYes! That is exactly as I see it. Inertia is inductance. But the prof (and the middle column of the table shown above) tell me inertia is capacitance. 🤔

author: langwadt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 05:16:12 pm
content: Quote from: johansen on July 26, 2025, 05:00:07 pmthe FIA is not stupid, rules are carefully written and everything is checked, approved, monitored. Breaking the technical regulations is generally disqualification no matter the circumstances

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 06:11:22 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on July 26, 2025, 04:00:50 pmI took that to mean they had modeled some condition, and when that happens the suspension behaves in some known way.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 06:24:16 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on July 26, 2025, 06:11:22 pmSorry but terms like 'can anticipate the input' and 'cancelled out before they occur' are severe red flags. A system can only respond to input after the input has occured.

author: Marco
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 06:33:46 pm
content: You know bumps are generally only a couple cm high. You know how long acceleration will be gone during gear shifts. There's a lot of small time constant events where you can guess how they proceed from the initial suspension force change.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 06:36:29 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on July 26, 2025, 06:24:16 pmTo me, it's just the author trying to convey what is going on to a wider audience.Another paperhttp://www-control.eng.cam.ac.uk/Homepage/papers/cued_control_860.pdf

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 06:37:44 pm
content: Quote from: Marco on July 26, 2025, 06:33:46 pmWe use techniques like this to speed up some measurements.

author: SteveThackery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 08:21:00 pm
content: I'd like to see a diagram showing exactly how they were utilised in a car suspension. They certainly won't have been a drop-in replacement for traditional dampers.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 08:37:02 pm
content: In a few of the papers I came across, I had seen a couple of photos showing how they were mounted in the F1. There is a lot of information available.https://x.com/ScarbsTech/status/1618251526946029568

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 08:49:54 pm
content: Onboard camera showing full active suspension compared to traditional.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 26, 2025, 09:02:16 pm
content: A lot to consider...

author: langwadt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2025, 08:59:01 pm
content: https://youtu.be/4FOjKXdqFZA?si=-JFHJD11OgJZrDFS