Red Bull RB18

[AR3-GP]

Amus reporting RB18 could be up to ~10kgs overweight currently.

[organic]

Amus reporting RB18 could be up to ~10kgs overweight currently.

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... se-rennen/

[nico5]

Amus reporting RB18 could be up to ~10kgs overweight currently.

Well, the report was of RB being only a couple of kgs above the limit after Spain, and since 8kg would be roughly 0.25s per lap I wonder what kind of mighty upgrade must they have had to offset that sort of deficit. Or it's just Marko-spread crap as it's often the case on Amus

[AR3-GP]

Amus reporting RB18 could be up to ~10kgs overweight currently.

Well, the report was of RB being only a couple of kgs above the limit after Spain, and since 8kg would be roughly 0.25s per lap I wonder what kind of mighty upgrade must they have had to offset that sort of deficit.

I'm not sure I follow. They can only run the car that the weight they were able to design to. If it's still competitive, it's not related to where it "could" have been if it was lighter.

At this point in the season, I don't feel that 10kg is something you just chop out of the car especially with the budget caps.

What I have seen so far:

1) Light weight DRS actuator - failed experiment in Barcelona
2) Switch to carbon floor stringers in Canada.

[Sieper]

The new (per Silverstone) bodywork cutout (and repositioning of cooling) could very well make the car a bit heavier again.

[RZS10]

If you look at those two gifs in my posts (1, 2) the change is mostly just added material on the shell, potentially add some additional internal ducting even without repositioning cooling components ... so yeah, it's likely that such an update could have been a trade off between weight vs. aero performance.
They might have beefed up some other components as well (like the DRS).

[nico5]

Amus reporting RB18 could be up to ~10kgs overweight currently.

Well, the report was of RB being only a couple of kgs above the limit after Spain, and since 8kg would be roughly 0.25s per lap I wonder what kind of mighty upgrade must they have had to offset that sort of deficit.

I'm not sure I follow. They can only run the car that the weight they were able to design to. If it's still competitive, it's not related to where it "could" have been if it was lighter.

At this point in the season, I don't feel that 10kg is something you just chop out of the car especially with the budget caps.

What I have seen so far:

1) Light weight DRS actuator - failed experiment in Barcelona
2) Switch to carbon floor stringers in Canada.

There's not much to follow. If you have a car which weighs 800kg and has X performance, resource-wise would you go for an upgrade which wins you, say, +5 performance with no weight gain or one that wins you +10 performance but costs you -4 in weight. It is a bigger (+1) gain still, but the underlying assumption is: chances are it's also more "expensive" (especially if it's aero) which doesn't feel like the best path to go down in a budget cap, CFD/WT-limited environment as it hinders further development down the line.
The other thing I was pointing out is that Amus, despite being one of the most reliable sources, also kinda have a tendency to report rumors which are conveniently put out by german speaking staff mostly at Merc or RB.

[DutchPanther]

Amus reporting RB18 could be up to ~10kgs overweight currently.

Well, the report was of RB being only a couple of kgs above the limit after Spain, and since 8kg would be roughly 0.25s per lap I wonder what kind of mighty upgrade must they have had to offset that sort of deficit.

I'm not sure I follow. They can only run the car that the weight they were able to design to. If it's still competitive, it's not related to where it "could" have been if it was lighter.

At this point in the season, I don't feel that 10kg is something you just chop out of the car especially with the budget caps.

What I have seen so far:

1) Light weight DRS actuator - failed experiment in Barcelona
2) Switch to carbon floor stringers in Canada.

Apparantly they switched back to the titanium floor stringers for Austria instead of the CFRP ones

[AR3-GP]

https://i.imgur.com/DzIK6WM.png

For reference, the carbon ones in Canada.

[DutchPanther]

https://i.imgur.com/DzIK6WM.png

For reference, the carbon ones in Canada.

I think they are trying to nail the TD039 regs before the break and, (in my opinion) they noticed more flexing with the CFRP beams

[Sieper]

I think so too.

[AR3-GP]

https://i.imgur.com/DzIK6WM.png

For reference, the carbon ones in Canada.

I think they are trying to nail the TD039 regs before the break and, (in my opinion) they noticed more flexing with the CFRP beams

TD039 addresses excessive plank deflection and wear. The floor stringers which are being highlighted in the images are related to floor edge stiffness.

[DutchPanther]

For reference, the carbon ones in Canada.

I think they are trying to nail the TD039 regs before the break and, (in my opinion) they noticed more flexing with the CFRP beams

TD039 addresses excessive plank deflection and wear. The floor stringers which are being highlighted in the images are related to floor edge stiffness.

Let's say that the outboard edges are meant to flex, if they flex down and 'seal' the sides they'll boost the ground effects making it harder for the suspension to cope and squat down thus rubbing the plank right? I think it's more like a butterfly effect, you optimise one thing and automatically you effect the other...

[gandharva]

https://i.imgur.com/DzIK6WM.png

For reference, the carbon ones in Canada.

I think they are trying to nail the TD039 regs before the break and, (in my opinion) they noticed more flexing with the CFRP beams

The opposite should be the case. Carbon fiber usually is much more rigid than titanium. Titanium also is a better shock absorber due to it's lower stiffness.

[DutchPanther]

For reference, the carbon ones in Canada.

I think they are trying to nail the TD039 regs before the break and, (in my opinion) they noticed more flexing with the CFRP beams

The opposite should be the case. Carbon fiber usually is much more rigid than titanium. Titanium also is a better shock absorber due to it's lower stiffness.

Actually yes you are right. Then I wonder if the CFRP beam got damaged after Silverstone and RB simply did not have enough time to reproduce it? Anyways we did not see the full extent of the damage to Max's floor