6 ms·

The Genius Device That Rocked F1

84 points by brudgers 1y ago

raldi 1y ago
…is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inerter_(mechanical_networks) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inerter_(mechanical_networks)
- SixDouble5321 1y ago
  Thanks for saving me 40 minutes.
- eitland 1y ago
  From the article: > Malcolm C. Smith, a control engineering professor at the University of Cambridge, first introduced inerters in a 2002 paper.[1] Smith extended the analogy between electrical and mechanical networks (the mobility analogy). He observed that the analogy was incomplete, since it was missing a mechanical device playing the same role as an electrical capacitor. The analogy makes mass the analog of capacitance, but the capacitor representing a mass always has one terminal connected to ground potential. In a real electrical network, capacitors can be connected between any two arbitrary potentials, they are not limited to ground. Noticing this, Smith set about finding a mechanical device that was a true analog of a capacitor. He found that he could construct such a device using gears and flywheels, one of several possible methods.
d_silin 1y ago
"...first introduced inerters in a 2002 paper." Damn impressive to discover a new mechanical system just from gears and flywheels.
cadamsdotcom 1y ago
Seems the flywheel in the device is what does the magic - dampening oscillations (which would demand the flywheel turn faster/slower, which its intertia will resist). Then it gets put in series with normal dampers that reduce compression/expansion. The inerter cancels vibrations & high frequency movement while the usual shock absorption components handle the rest of the shock absorption, making a great team. Have I understood it right?
- Daneel_ 1y ago
  The key takeaway for me was that it actively resists the oscillations, making it a more effective damper than a shock absorber in a range of situations, but it doesn't replace the shock. Donut Media actually has a great video on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t58qjcNwEbo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t58qjcNwEbo As far as my understanding goes, it's basically a low-pass filter that also provides momentum in the direction of movement - this actively dampens spring oscillation (as opposed to a shock absorber, which passively dampens oscillation). It should be installed in parallel with the spring and shock.
- brudgers 1y ago
  If I understood the video correctly, the simple mechanical model is an inerter is the inverse of a spring. Analogous to a capacitor being the inverse of an inductor in an electrical model. Trying to find a better mechanical analog to the capacitor to optimize a passive suspension was the motivation because mass-damping suspensions had already been banned when active suspension got banned. But I probably misunderstood the video.
- gorgoiler 1y ago
  What the inerter does is it gives the feeling of greater inertial mass between the two ends of the device. If you push on the inerter it feels like you are pushing on a boat in a marina: slow go get moving when you push it, and slow to come to rest when you push (or pull) it back the other way. It does this because flywheels hold momentum but as angular momentum. The inerter converts linear motion to angular momentum. The gearing also it to give the same effect of an enormous inertial mass without itself being massive. My understanding as to why this is useful is as follows. Suspension works best when the vehicle is heavy and the wheels are light. Imagine a battle tank on ultra strong bicycle wheels: the tank would glide along as the wheels jump up and down over every dip and bump. Something similar happens when you drive home with a car load of paving slabs. Having a massive vehicle is a huge penalty though for other reasons. Battle tanks are not nimble! The only thing you really want the mass for is as an inertial mass in the suspension system. For accelerating and going around corners you’d rather it wasn’t there at all.
epolanski 1y ago
It's quite insane to think how much faster F1 could be, especially on older regulations without development and budget limitations. Regulations have been trying to limit the speed of the cars for decades, with only partial success.
- gausswho 1y ago
  Not just speed nerfing. The cars now are ~50% larger than they used to be, while the tracks haven't gotten any wider. As a result, there's hardly any overtaking unless an egregious mistake is made. The lame solution they have to this is to allow cars one second behind to mechanically reduce their drag in selected spots of the track (DPS). And don't get me started on the tire regulations. F1, from the cars to the drivers, is peak manufactured drama.
  - MindSpunk 1y ago
    Just about every motorsport series is manufactured drama. The rules and restrictions are arbitrary. Anything with a large televised audience will have the rules impacted by trying to make a spectacle. It's not exclusive to F1. F1 certainly has its issues though, the cars are just too big. Monaco has been a joke of a race for a while, the "race" is won in qualifying. 2026 might be better as the cars are getting smaller again.
  - FatalLogic 1y ago
    >peak manufactured drama That's largely true. There is at least one, wonderful, reward from all the rule-fiddling, though it might be orthogonal to the issues you've highlighted, but driver deaths and severe injuries are much less common than they used to be. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Formula_One_fatalities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Formula_One_fatalities A cynic would say that, if the arena no longer offers us the ever-present possibility of death, then the drama needs to be enhanced in other ways, even if they are artificial.
    - breve 1y ago
      Romain Grosjean survived his car being torn in half: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQ7_En2xEm4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQ7_En2xEm4
xdennis 1y ago
Donut explains the inerter much better: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t58qjcNwEbo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t58qjcNwEbo
rasz 1y ago
Pretty much same device as prototype visible on video in front of Malcolm Smith, except invented ~10 years prior https://thisisit.edu.pl/lucjan-lagiewka-geniusz-czy-oszust https://thisisit.edu.pl/lucjan-lagiewka-geniusz-czy-oszust demonstration https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ow-cgHAfNI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ow-cgHAfNI There was one problem, inventor Lucjan Łągiewka tried to patent it in Poland. Polish Patent office decided its a scam because nothing can work this well.

84 points by brudgers 1y ago

…is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inerter_(mechanical_networks) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inerter_(mechanical_networks)

SixDouble5321 1y ago
Thanks for saving me 40 minutes.
eitland 1y ago
From the article: > Malcolm C. Smith, a control engineering professor at the University of Cambridge, first introduced inerters in a 2002 paper.[1] Smith extended the analogy between electrical and mechanical networks (the mobility analogy). He observed that the analogy was incomplete, since it was missing a mechanical device playing the same role as an electrical capacitor. The analogy makes mass the analog of capacitance, but the capacitor representing a mass always has one terminal connected to ground potential. In a real electrical network, capacitors can be connected between any two arbitrary potentials, they are not limited to ground. Noticing this, Smith set about finding a mechanical device that was a true analog of a capacitor. He found that he could construct such a device using gears and flywheels, one of several possible methods.

d_silin 1y ago

"...first introduced inerters in a 2002 paper." Damn impressive to discover a new mechanical system just from gears and flywheels.

cadamsdotcom 1y ago

Seems the flywheel in the device is what does the magic - dampening oscillations (which would demand the flywheel turn faster/slower, which its intertia will resist). Then it gets put in series with normal dampers that reduce compression/expansion. The inerter cancels vibrations & high frequency movement while the usual shock absorption components handle the rest of the shock absorption, making a great team. Have I understood it right?

Daneel_ 1y ago
The key takeaway for me was that it actively resists the oscillations, making it a more effective damper than a shock absorber in a range of situations, but it doesn't replace the shock. Donut Media actually has a great video on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t58qjcNwEbo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t58qjcNwEbo As far as my understanding goes, it's basically a low-pass filter that also provides momentum in the direction of movement - this actively dampens spring oscillation (as opposed to a shock absorber, which passively dampens oscillation). It should be installed in parallel with the spring and shock.
brudgers 1y ago
If I understood the video correctly, the simple mechanical model is an inerter is the inverse of a spring. Analogous to a capacitor being the inverse of an inductor in an electrical model. Trying to find a better mechanical analog to the capacitor to optimize a passive suspension was the motivation because mass-damping suspensions had already been banned when active suspension got banned. But I probably misunderstood the video.
gorgoiler 1y ago
What the inerter does is it gives the feeling of greater inertial mass between the two ends of the device. If you push on the inerter it feels like you are pushing on a boat in a marina: slow go get moving when you push it, and slow to come to rest when you push (or pull) it back the other way. It does this because flywheels hold momentum but as angular momentum. The inerter converts linear motion to angular momentum. The gearing also it to give the same effect of an enormous inertial mass without itself being massive. My understanding as to why this is useful is as follows. Suspension works best when the vehicle is heavy and the wheels are light. Imagine a battle tank on ultra strong bicycle wheels: the tank would glide along as the wheels jump up and down over every dip and bump. Something similar happens when you drive home with a car load of paving slabs. Having a massive vehicle is a huge penalty though for other reasons. Battle tanks are not nimble! The only thing you really want the mass for is as an inertial mass in the suspension system. For accelerating and going around corners you’d rather it wasn’t there at all.

epolanski 1y ago

It's quite insane to think how much faster F1 could be, especially on older regulations without development and budget limitations. Regulations have been trying to limit the speed of the cars for decades, with only partial success.

gausswho 1y ago
Not just speed nerfing. The cars now are ~50% larger than they used to be, while the tracks haven't gotten any wider. As a result, there's hardly any overtaking unless an egregious mistake is made. The lame solution they have to this is to allow cars one second behind to mechanically reduce their drag in selected spots of the track (DPS). And don't get me started on the tire regulations. F1, from the cars to the drivers, is peak manufactured drama.
- MindSpunk 1y ago
  Just about every motorsport series is manufactured drama. The rules and restrictions are arbitrary. Anything with a large televised audience will have the rules impacted by trying to make a spectacle. It's not exclusive to F1. F1 certainly has its issues though, the cars are just too big. Monaco has been a joke of a race for a while, the "race" is won in qualifying. 2026 might be better as the cars are getting smaller again.
- FatalLogic 1y ago
  >peak manufactured drama That's largely true. There is at least one, wonderful, reward from all the rule-fiddling, though it might be orthogonal to the issues you've highlighted, but driver deaths and severe injuries are much less common than they used to be. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Formula_One_fatalities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Formula_One_fatalities A cynic would say that, if the arena no longer offers us the ever-present possibility of death, then the drama needs to be enhanced in other ways, even if they are artificial.
  - breve 1y ago
    Romain Grosjean survived his car being torn in half: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQ7_En2xEm4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQ7_En2xEm4

xdennis 1y ago

Donut explains the inerter much better: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t58qjcNwEbo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t58qjcNwEbo

rasz 1y ago

Pretty much same device as prototype visible on video in front of Malcolm Smith, except invented ~10 years prior https://thisisit.edu.pl/lucjan-lagiewka-geniusz-czy-oszust https://thisisit.edu.pl/lucjan-lagiewka-geniusz-czy-oszust demonstration https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ow-cgHAfNI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ow-cgHAfNI There was one problem, inventor Lucjan Łągiewka tried to patent it in Poland. Polish Patent office decided its a scam because nothing can work this well.