Red Bull RB18

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter does not belong here.
AR3-GP
AR3-GP
60
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:22 am

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

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

User avatar
organic
106
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2022 1:24 am
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

AR3-GP wrote:
Sun Jul 10, 2022 11:01 pm
Amus reporting RB18 could be up to ~10kgs overweight currently.
https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... se-rennen/

User avatar
nico5
10
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 5:55 pm

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

AR3-GP wrote:
Sun Jul 10, 2022 11:01 pm
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
AR3-GP
60
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:22 am

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

nico5 wrote:
Sun Jul 10, 2022 11:18 pm
AR3-GP wrote:
Sun Jul 10, 2022 11:01 pm
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.

User avatar
Sieper
68
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:19 pm

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

The new (per Silverstone) bodywork cutout (and repositioning of cooling) could very well make the car a bit heavier again.
Controversy does not have a short memory.

User avatar
RZS10
315
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 12:23 am

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

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).

User avatar
nico5
10
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 5:55 pm

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

AR3-GP wrote:
Mon Jul 11, 2022 12:43 am
nico5 wrote:
Sun Jul 10, 2022 11:18 pm
AR3-GP wrote:
Sun Jul 10, 2022 11:01 pm
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.

User avatar
DutchPanther
6
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2021 12:27 am

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

AR3-GP wrote:
Mon Jul 11, 2022 12:43 am
nico5 wrote:
Sun Jul 10, 2022 11:18 pm
AR3-GP wrote:
Sun Jul 10, 2022 11:01 pm
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
How hard can it be? ~Jeremious Clarksonious

AR3-GP
AR3-GP
60
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:22 am

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

organic wrote:
Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:13 pm
https://i.imgur.com/DzIK6WM.png
For reference, the carbon ones in Canada.

User avatar
DutchPanther
6
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2021 12:27 am

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

AR3-GP wrote:
Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:00 pm
organic wrote:
Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:13 pm
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
How hard can it be? ~Jeremious Clarksonious

User avatar
Sieper
68
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:19 pm

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

I think so too.
Controversy does not have a short memory.

AR3-GP
AR3-GP
60
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:22 am

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

DutchPanther wrote:
Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:10 pm
AR3-GP wrote:
Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:00 pm
organic wrote:
Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:13 pm
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.

User avatar
DutchPanther
6
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2021 12:27 am

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

AR3-GP wrote:
Tue Jul 12, 2022 3:00 pm
DutchPanther wrote:
Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:10 pm
AR3-GP wrote:
Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:00 pm


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...
How hard can it be? ~Jeremious Clarksonious

User avatar
gandharva
223
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 2:19 pm
Location: Munich

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

DutchPanther wrote:
Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:10 pm
AR3-GP wrote:
Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:00 pm
organic wrote:
Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:13 pm
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.

User avatar
DutchPanther
6
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2021 12:27 am

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

gandharva wrote:
Tue Jul 12, 2022 3:30 pm
DutchPanther wrote:
Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:10 pm
AR3-GP wrote:
Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:00 pm


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
How hard can it be? ~Jeremious Clarksonious