| Welcome to The Pit Lane. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Are Red Bull noses made of rubber? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Nov 7 2012, 04:34 PM (504 Views) | |
| Norbert | Nov 7 2012, 04:34 PM Post #1 |
![]() ![]()
|
Recent slow motion and not so slow motion videos appear to show the whole front end of the Red Bull car, and not just the front wings managing to flex around rather like they're made of rubber. Very clever how they get this through scrutineering....![]() ![]() We've all seen he wings on cars twitch over the years, but on the current RB, the whole nose cone appears to flex all over the place. The theory is that the nose has a soft shell, and the crash structure is underneath. Under load, areas outside the tested area can deform to RB's preferred aero shape, allowing the actual wings to pivot back slightly and create more downforce. In addition, the FIA test only puts a downward load on the wings, meaning that the can flex backwards as well. Clever man that Newey.... |
![]() |
|
| John | Nov 7 2012, 05:30 PM Post #2 |
|
Team Boss
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
End of...
|
![]() |
|
| Steelstallions | Nov 7 2012, 06:24 PM Post #3 |
![]()
Driver
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It looks like flexible carbon over hydro suspension, up to the other teams to copy or have investigated by FIA |
![]() |
|
| Norbert | Nov 7 2012, 06:30 PM Post #4 |
![]() ![]()
|
Wait until someone successfully protests their movable ballast, aka 'engine reliability' helping fluid transfer ....
|
![]() |
|
| TheCompleteGuitarist | Nov 7 2012, 06:36 PM Post #5 |
|
Driver
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
is it really allowed to move so much? Or does that not matter? |
![]() |
|
| Norbert | Nov 7 2012, 06:40 PM Post #6 |
![]() ![]()
|
Erm... aero devices aren't allowed to move more than a certain amount when tested. Moveable aero devices except DRS are illegal. However, if you can make your wing flex in a manner that isn't tested by the test, you can do what you like, which is why the mass used for the test was doubled after Red Bull found a way around it. What is really worrying is that the entire nose of the car is moving here, not just the wings. Rather like a few years ago before whatever they were up to in that respect got banned. The nose of the car appears to be acting as a mass damper these days, which of course got banned in 2006.... |
![]() |
|
| John | Nov 7 2012, 06:41 PM Post #7 |
|
Team Boss
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Some times other teams have similar concepts under development (not copied) but wait for another team to race it, if it passes they can quickly bring theirs into play... But If this is a clever concept and it indeed passes all scrutineering then it would be the same for next season (I guess), so if others do not use it already they will soon. Of course it may get 'clarified' before then
|
![]() |
|
| John | Nov 16 2012, 01:36 PM Post #8 |
|
Team Boss
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
|
![]() |
|
| TheCompleteGuitarist | Nov 16 2012, 01:40 PM Post #9 |
|
Driver
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Are moveable aero devices except DRS illegal? Becuase in first image the gif, the front wing, which I believe is an aero device, is moving a lot. |
![]() |
|
| John | Nov 16 2012, 01:43 PM Post #10 |
|
Team Boss
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
CW says they pass... good enough for me. ![]() If someone can provide a similar movie of a McLaren or Ferrari for comparision it would be useful. |
![]() |
|
| TheCompleteGuitarist | Nov 16 2012, 02:08 PM Post #11 |
|
Driver
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That wasn't my question. My question was are moveable earo devices except DRS illegal, yes or no. Second (rhetorical )question/statement It looks like the front wing aero device is moving a lot???? Or is an optical illusion? |
![]() |
|
| TheCompleteGuitarist | Nov 16 2012, 02:24 PM Post #12 |
|
Driver
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/20351041
With regard to the last part of this comment, I am not under the impression that RBR have a straight line top speed advantage, rather the opposite. Just posting, because it's obviously still a concern within the sport. |
![]() |
|
| Norbert | Nov 18 2012, 11:17 AM Post #13 |
![]() ![]()
|
RBR have a speed disadvantage partially because the 'unreliable' Renault engine, that affords them moveable ballast in the form of fluid transfer to allegedly help it not explode, is a little lacking on power, and because of all the wing they ladle onto the car so it's quick around corners. Just imagine how much slower they'd be in a straight line if the front wing didn't fold back on itself, the nose didn't sink, and the front of the floor didn't scrap the tarmac! |
![]() |
|
| TheCompleteGuitarist | Nov 18 2012, 06:26 PM Post #14 |
|
Driver
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
you make it sound like concord |
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · Formula 1 · Next Topic » |












![]](http://z6.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)


1:04 AM Jul 11