Red Bull RB8 Renault

[Richard]

Because it crashed front first.

Mods please, end this.

Seconded.

Members please, report posts using the report button!

[hardingfv32]

Raptor22, I would say this mounting system did not fail. The center span is still in perfect orientation.

Brian

[Twaddle]

At risk of fanning the flames... Why on earth do you think this is any more than a pair of connectors that are --- by hitting something?

For me, it doesn't look like the central section has moved. I also doubt that you could impact the wing in such a way as to bend the connection bolts without breaking the pylons.

[bill shoe]

I don't know if the interesting wing angle is the result of design, or some sort of failure/crash.

However, the front wing pictures (and this thread's discussion of them) are clearly significant. Anyone who claims the wing broke in an ordinary accident and there is nothing interesting or significant about its subsequent orientation is asking me to be dim.

At risk of fanning the flames... Why on earth do you think this is any more than a pair of connectors that are --- by hitting something?

because as hardingfv32 has (I think) suggested,

1. The center section appears to have little or no angle compared to the main outboard parts, and
2. It seems odd that a broken wing would have such a position. I've seen plenty of broken front wings over the years, including many on late model F1 cars, and they never hang off the ground in that orientation. And they never maintain such a rigid orientation once broken.

I don't know what's going on, but there is something going on. Good for Red Bull.

And no you were not fanning flames by asking.

[hardingfv32]

To me it seems to suggest that the RB front wing is manufactured roughly how it appears in its 'broken' state and has an internal mechanism that applies torque about the axis of the mandated central section to pull it into its 'normal' state.

Can you expand on this thought to how this type of construction would function on the track? I understand your general theory, but can not see how to implement it.

Brian

[beelsebob]

At risk of fanning the flames... Why on earth do you think this is any more than a pair of connectors that are --- by hitting something?

For me, it doesn't look like the central section has moved. I also doubt that you could impact the wing in such a way as to bend the connection bolts without breaking the pylons.

It's *really* easy for something convex like this to look the same, despite tilting a few degrees forward.

[jammer84_03]

I don't know if the interesting wing angle is the result of design, or some sort of failure/crash.

However, the front wing pictures (and this thread's discussion of them) are clearly significant. Anyone who claims the wing broke in an ordinary accident and there is nothing interesting or significant about its subsequent orientation is asking me to be dim.

At risk of fanning the flames... Why on earth do you think this is any more than a pair of connectors that are --- by hitting something?

because as hardingfv32 has (I think) suggested,

1. The center section appears to have little or no angle compared to the main outboard parts, and
2. It seems odd that a broken wing would have such a position. I've seen plenty of broken front wings over the years, including many on late model F1 cars, and they never hang off the ground in that orientation. And they never maintain such a rigid orientation once broken.

I don't know what's going on, but there is something going on. Good for Red Bull.

And no you were not fanning flames by asking.

Agreed bill

There is definately something that is not right with its orientation. Thats where the flexi-wing debate comes to play and does it use a cable system?

It would be nice to see a recording or sequential picture gallery of that off so we could see exactly how the wing was tweaked, and that might give us better clues as to how the wing is designed to operate

[Pup]

Jeez, you guys.

Look, these photos are taken at about the same angle. If anything the bottom photo is taken from a slightly lower angle. Yet, in the bottom photo you can see more of the top of the center section. So yes, the center section is indeed bent down along with the rest of the wing. Also note that even though in the first photo the car is under heavy braking, the fronts of the wings in both photos are about the same distance from the ground.




And here, it's even more obvious that the front section of the wing is indeed lower than normal...




The wing is bent - no conspiracy, no cheats, no mystical forces holding it in place. It's bent.

Now, can we instead get beck to important stuff, like talking about how McLaren are going to kick you guys' tails this season?

[Dragonfly]

Last year, after the photos of cables hanging out from the broken pylons, I think there was a common agreement that teams use cables to apply tension to otherwise light and not much rigid wing structure. To limit the flex and make the wing compliant with the test rules.
If, as a result of the hit in the area of the pylons, the tension has increased and some structural integrity might be disrupted also, it's not abnormal to have the outer unsupported parts to deform one way or another.
What bothers me is the bias that if it's RBR there certainly is something illegal.And the hunt begins, and the thread goes nuts.

[bonjon1979]

notice that nice big hole below the front suspension arm ?

I wonder where they are getting the airflow from to feed it and blow the diffuser?

see blue line

I'm not sure the red line is right. I've a feeling that they're trying to pull the red line (exhaust flow) through the channel with the blue flow, see how the duct is aimed to pull it over the side of the sidepod for it to be sucked in below and fed through to the diffuser. I'm not sure this will get away with passing the gases mustn't be 'reingested' directive...we'll see though.

[beelsebob]

I'm not sure the red line is right. I've a feeling that they're trying to pull the red line (exhaust flow) through the channel with the blue flow, see how the duct is aimed to pull it over the side of the sidepod for it to be sucked in below and fed through to the diffuser. I'm not sure this will get away with passing the gases mustn't be 'reingested' directive...we'll see though.

1) Why would they do something so complex when they could much more simply just aim it at the beam wing and get the same effect.
2) No, they wouldn't get away with the "reingested" regulation.

[TheRMVR]

Vettel on autosport.com

"I went off track and broke the front wing and had to come in, and it took quite a while to get back out and just before lunch we suffered a problem with the gearbox so we have to fix it and get back out after lunch."

[pyrosian]

Is it possible that RB have a torsion bar type setup running through the width of the front wing? My reason for thinking this would be that under high speeds/loads the wing surface would be forced down or flattened by the down-force acting on it. If the wing was formed with a large amount of rake and then the torsion bar was used to flatten the end sections you would have less movement when loads are applied. Allowing for a thinner, lighter more complex wing shape?

If the torsion bar was 1 piece running left to right through the leading edge of the wing it could be fixed in place in the neutral center and twisted from there out. If Sebastian hit the center of the wing in an accident then the pins/mounts/bolts/whatever that was holding the torsion bar solid could have broken leading to the wing returning to its natural shape.

Does this sound plausible to anyone else?

[irang]

Vettel on autosport.com

"I went off track and broke the front wing and had to come in, and it took quite a while to get back out and just before lunch we suffered a problem with the gearbox so we have to fix it and get back out after lunch."

Horner told that to AMuS before the lunch break and it was reported on this thread. But they just refused to believe his words.

viewtopic.php?f=12&t=11807&start=1110 (from the 6th)

[Adrian Newby]

The "bridge" is just the most extremely undercut sidepod in F1 history. I think they're cramming all the air they possibly can down the middle in an attempt to force the exhaust to stay outboard.

In a manner of speaking, they're using the air flow over the car to seal off the exhaust so that the exhaust can seal off the air flow under the car.

That's f@^$!# brilliant, if you ask me.

This.

Exactly this.

Well said.