Magneto-rheological dampers

Post Reply
hardingfv32-1
Posts: 1014
Joined: December 1st, 2006, 8:01 pm

Magneto-rheological dampers

Post by hardingfv32-1 »

A competitor in the NW states 'Warp Field Racing Dampers' as a sponsor. I can not state whether they are actually used by him. I am interested in the technology but have a concern relative to the FV class.

While shocks are free, our power sources 'seem' restricted. I read C.11 as precluding the powering of shock, cooling fans, crankcase evacuation punps, etc. Is this a correct interpretation? Does the wording of C.11.A allow for electrical loads other than those stated?

C.11. Battery
A. The use of any single 6- or 12- volt battery is permitted to power
the starter and engine ignition system.
B. Any secondary batteries connected only to gauges, and communications
or data acquisition equipment are allowed

Brian
brian
Posts: 1348
Joined: June 26th, 2006, 12:31 pm

Re: Magneto-rheological dampers

Post by brian »

Brian, you are right about batteries and our rules but I understand that some of this technology does not require outside power sources.
The above post is for reference only and your results may vary. This post is not intended to reflect the views or opinions of SCCA and should not be considered an analysis or opinion of the rules written in the GCR.
hardingfv32-1
Posts: 1014
Joined: December 1st, 2006, 8:01 pm

Re: Magneto-rheological dampers

Post by hardingfv32-1 »

Yes.... Self-Powered Magnetorheological Dampers operated by the energy harvested from vibration and shock environment.

Thanks
Brian
Mike Kochanski
Posts: 16
Joined: October 24th, 2008, 8:12 pm

Re: Magneto-rheological dampers

Post by Mike Kochanski »

:shock: Oh Boy!!
tiagosantos
Posts: 389
Joined: June 20th, 2010, 12:10 am

Re: Magneto-rheological dampers

Post by tiagosantos »

That rule also seems to preclude powering a rain light..

Which is fine by me as my farts are luminous!
hardingfv32-1
Posts: 1014
Joined: December 1st, 2006, 8:01 pm

Re: Magneto-rheological dampers

Post by hardingfv32-1 »

Very good observation. Ask for a rule change.

Brian
smsazzy
Posts: 703
Joined: June 24th, 2006, 5:56 pm

Re: Magneto-rheological dampers

Post by smsazzy »

Two big loopholes in the rules. Figure them out.

Hint: as long as the shock is logging it's movement via the magnetic field, you are technically logging data. No different than the heater on an O2 sensor.

Hint 2: powering off the ignition system components.
Stephen Saslow
FV 09 NWR
hardingfv32-1
Posts: 1014
Joined: December 1st, 2006, 8:01 pm

Re: Magneto-rheological dampers

Post by hardingfv32-1 »

I am intrigued with your logic or proposed loopholes:

1) How do you translate the state of a magnetorheological fluid, usually controlled by a magnetfield in this type of shock system, into a linear shock measurement? Or any type of shock measurement for that matter?

2) A O2 sensor requires power to function as a test instrument. What is the test instrument that requires power in the case of a magneto-rheological damper?

3) How do you power off the ignition system? Using a wire attached to the ignition system to power the shocks is not going to fly. This is just a form a parallel circuit using a power source restricted for use by the ignition or starter. Creating a ignition system that develops power for a secondary use is by definition a generator, etc. Again this is not a legal use of the ignition/starter power source.

Brian
smsazzy
Posts: 703
Joined: June 24th, 2006, 5:56 pm

Re: Magneto-rheological dampers

Post by smsazzy »

Brian,

I am not here to help you figure it out.

Will you be at Portland? I will be running in Portland.

Stephen
Stephen Saslow
FV 09 NWR
hardingfv32-1
Posts: 1014
Joined: December 1st, 2006, 8:01 pm

Re: Magneto-rheological dampers

Post by hardingfv32-1 »

If your not going to help me, who is... the Stewards?

Yes, I hope to be at Portland.

Brian
smsazzy
Posts: 703
Joined: June 24th, 2006, 5:56 pm

Re: Magneto-rheological dampers

Post by smsazzy »

Hope to see you there Brian!
Stephen Saslow
FV 09 NWR
Post Reply