Red Bull RB18

[DutchPanther]

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...

W13 floor edge moves much more than the RB18 floor edge. Mercedes are not concerned. RB don't appear to be either.

I think that's because RB has a way more advanced floor and does not need the 'help' of the floor edge to boost its ground effects.

[godlameroso]

https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/R ... 905612.jpg

Back to that wear pattern in the plank… how can the central line wear while the left edge and the right edge do not?
It is a rhetorical question, but is that a natural plank cross section?

It is wearing more on the edges, do you see the wear bevels? The cars still roll and pitch, and that is the closest part to the ground. The plank is not being worn abnormally however. The dimensions of the surrounding bodywork is closely prescribed. The plank stiffness is closely prescribed as well. As stated, the Mercedes floor flexes much more than the RBR floor. You can see the wear bevels on the Mercedes floor, in fact, the Mercedes floor itself touches the ground instead of the plank. The Mercedes floor flexes so much that the plank ends up acting as a spine for the floor. RBR doesn't have this deficiency, simple as.

[DutchPanther]

https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/R ... 905612.jpg

I can't believe no one mentions the most obvious thing. Do you generate more lift with a narrow or wide wing? If the kick up point is wider will it generate more suction than if it's narrower?

https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/R ... 905612.jpg

Do you think this cigar shape generates more suction at the kick up point?

By the continuity equation, as the wider the area the air has to spread (than it's previous local point), the lesser the amount of pressure in that area and more the suction. So, the narrower the kickup point the more suction it will have right?

[Just_a_fan]

https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/R ... 905612.jpg

Back to that wear pattern in the plank… how can the central line wear while the left edge and the right edge do not?
It is a rhetorical question, but is that a natural plank cross section?

It is wearing more on the edges, do you see the wear bevels? The cars still roll and pitch, and that is the closest part to the ground. The plank is not being worn abnormally however. The dimensions of the surrounding bodywork is closely prescribed. The plank stiffness is closely prescribed as well. As stated, the Mercedes floor flexes much more than the RBR floor. You can see the wear bevels on the Mercedes floor, in fact, the Mercedes floor itself touches the ground instead of the plank. The Mercedes floor flexes so much that the plank ends up acting as a spine for the floor. RBR doesn't have this deficiency, simple as.

All very nice and diversionary, but it fails to answer the question as to why the plank is not wearing evenly both in longitudinal and lateral aspects.

The discussion isn't about floor edges - Red Bull, for example have a metal skate to control ride height there - it's about the plank. The plank is supposed to be uniformly supported along its length and its width. Non uniform wear suggests that the plank has a built in method of avoiding wear. That, of course, would be contrary to the rules and certainly contrary to the new TD. The TD that Red Bull (and Ferrari) have managed to delay by an extra 4 weeks. Why delay it if it won't cause problems? That's known as "the smoking gun" and merely points to these teams needing time to change their car to meet the rules.

[DutchPanther]

https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/R ... 905612.jpg

Back to that wear pattern in the plank… how can the central line wear while the left edge and the right edge do not?
It is a rhetorical question, but is that a natural plank cross section?

It is wearing more on the edges, do you see the wear bevels? The cars still roll and pitch, and that is the closest part to the ground. The plank is not being worn abnormally however. The dimensions of the surrounding bodywork is closely prescribed. The plank stiffness is closely prescribed as well. As stated, the Mercedes floor flexes much more than the RBR floor. You can see the wear bevels on the Mercedes floor, in fact, the Mercedes floor itself touches the ground instead of the plank. The Mercedes floor flexes so much that the plank ends up acting as a spine for the floor. RBR doesn't have this deficiency, simple as.

All very nice and diversionary, but it fails to answer the question as to why the plank is not wearing evenly both in longitudinal and lateral aspects.

The discussion isn't about floor edges - Red Bull, for example have a metal skate to control ride height there - it's about the plank. The plank is supposed to be uniformly supported along its length and its width. Non uniform wear suggests that the plank has a built in method of avoiding wear. That, of course, would be contrary to the rules and certainly contrary to the new TD. The TD that Red Bull (and Ferrari) have managed to delay by an extra 4 weeks. Why delay it if it won't cause problems? That's known as "the smoking gun" and merely points to these teams needing time to change their car to meet the rules.

I think you are meaning to ask why the plank has uniform wear patterns only towards the centre and not an uniform wear throughout right?

[Just_a_fan]

It is wearing more on the edges, do you see the wear bevels? The cars still roll and pitch, and that is the closest part to the ground. The plank is not being worn abnormally however. The dimensions of the surrounding bodywork is closely prescribed. The plank stiffness is closely prescribed as well. As stated, the Mercedes floor flexes much more than the RBR floor. You can see the wear bevels on the Mercedes floor, in fact, the Mercedes floor itself touches the ground instead of the plank. The Mercedes floor flexes so much that the plank ends up acting as a spine for the floor. RBR doesn't have this deficiency, simple as.

All very nice and diversionary, but it fails to answer the question as to why the plank is not wearing evenly both in longitudinal and lateral aspects.

The discussion isn't about floor edges - Red Bull, for example have a metal skate to control ride height there - it's about the plank. The plank is supposed to be uniformly supported along its length and its width. Non uniform wear suggests that the plank has a built in method of avoiding wear. That, of course, would be contrary to the rules and certainly contrary to the new TD. The TD that Red Bull (and Ferrari) have managed to delay by an extra 4 weeks. Why delay it if it won't cause problems? That's known as "the smoking gun" and merely points to these teams needing time to change their car to meet the rules.

I think you are meaning to ask why the plank has uniform wear patterns only towards the centre and not an uniform wear throughout right?

The question is why isn't it uniform in both directions? The plank is flat, the track is "effectively" flat. Rub a flat piece of wood over a flat abrasive surface and what do you get? A broadly uniform wear pattern across the entire surface.

[godlameroso]

All very nice and diversionary, but it fails to answer the question as to why the plank is not wearing evenly both in longitudinal and lateral aspects.

The discussion isn't about floor edges - Red Bull, for example have a metal skate to control ride height there - it's about the plank. The plank is supposed to be uniformly supported along its length and its width. Non uniform wear suggests that the plank has a built in method of avoiding wear. That, of course, would be contrary to the rules and certainly contrary to the new TD. The TD that Red Bull (and Ferrari) have managed to delay by an extra 4 weeks. Why delay it if it won't cause problems? That's known as "the smoking gun" and merely points to these teams needing time to change their car to meet the rules.

I think you are meaning to ask why the plank has uniform wear patterns only towards the centre and not an uniform wear throughout right?

The question is why isn't it uniform in both directions? The plank is flat, the track is "effectively" flat. Rub a flat piece of wood over a flat abrasive surface and what do you get? A broadly uniform wear pattern across the entire surface.

Not true, if you drag a piece of wood across the ground you will get a hovercraft effect as the air tries to fill the low pressure caused by the plate. Furthermore, the plank is beveled at the edges. The plank itself creates some downforce.



At least according to William Toet.

[Just_a_fan]

I think you are meaning to ask why the plank has uniform wear patterns only towards the centre and not an uniform wear throughout right?

The question is why isn't it uniform in both directions? The plank is flat, the track is "effectively" flat. Rub a flat piece of wood over a flat abrasive surface and what do you get? A broadly uniform wear pattern across the entire surface.

Not true, if you drag a piece of wood across the ground you will get a hovercraft effect as the air tries to fill the low pressure caused by the plate. Furthermore, the plank is beveled at the edges. The plank itself creates some downforce.

https://media-exp1.licdn.com/dms/image/ ... d8YF4LdmXc

At least according to William Toet.

That's not a flat plank. It's a bluff body diffuser model.

The point at which the plank is dragging on the tarmac, it is not producing downforce. When in contact with the ground, there is no air below the plank. That's what "being in contact with" means, basically.

What the Red Bull wear looks like to me is a plank that touches down along the longitudinal centre line (heavy wear) and then flexes to bring the edges (less wear) in to contact with the track. Yes, the plank has an edge bevel, but it doesn't extend to up 40% of the width of the plank in varying amounts.


Again, if the Red Bull plank installation was kosher, they wouldn't need 6 weeks to make it comply with the rules...

[godlameroso]

The question is why isn't it uniform in both directions? The plank is flat, the track is "effectively" flat. Rub a flat piece of wood over a flat abrasive surface and what do you get? A broadly uniform wear pattern across the entire surface.

Not true, if you drag a piece of wood across the ground you will get a hovercraft effect as the air tries to fill the low pressure caused by the plate. Furthermore, the plank is beveled at the edges. The plank itself creates some downforce.

https://media-exp1.licdn.com/dms/image/ ... d8YF4LdmXc

At least according to William Toet.

That's not a flat plank. It's a bluff body diffuser model.

The point at which the plank is dragging on the tarmac, it is not producing downforce. When in contact with the ground, there is no air below the plank. That's what "being in contact with" means, basically.

What the Red Bull wear looks like to me is a plank that touches down along the longitudinal centre line (heavy wear) and then flexes to bring the edges (less wear) in to contact with the track. Yes, the plank has an edge bevel, but it doesn't extend to up 40% of the width of the plank in varying amounts.


Again, if the Red Bull plank installation was kosher, they wouldn't need 6 weeks to make it comply with the rules...

If there's no air as you say, then there is a pressure difference between that vacuum and the higher pressure air surrounding it. IE downforce. Then it stands to reason that any air that goes over the plank through the chassis would likely push down on the plank. Since the pressure is lower at the center, the center of the plank is pulled down. However there is no abnormal wear at the length of the plank, only in the part that squeezes more air out of the floor. Nature abhors a vacuum and will do whatever it can to fill said vacuum. Even pushing the plank down a bit, but it's not worn abnormally so what's the problem dude.

[Stu]

Please stop!
The plank in the photos has a wear pattern that is not uniform laterally or longitudinally. The wear pattern looks to be affected by its fixing method.

Neither of these statements are unique to this car.

If you wish to continue, take it to the correct thread (TD0039), where it may be freely discussed as a technical subject.

[RZS10]

I am seeing it right that the skinny exposed stay is connected to the carbon or titanium rear support?

You mean this part? Seems likely ... good catch.

[Baulz]

I am seeing it right that the skinny exposed stay is connected to the carbon or titanium rear support?

You mean this part? Seems likely ... good catch.

I thought it was a clever solution.

[diffuser]

https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/R ... 905612.jpg

Back to that wear pattern in the plank… how can the central line wear while the left edge and the right edge do not?
It is a rhetorical question, but is that a natural plank cross section?

I think that it's a psych test and we're supposed to say what that looks like to us....Looks like 2 seals having sex to me!

[AR3-GP]

https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/R ... 905612.jpg

Back to that wear pattern in the plank… how can the central line wear while the left edge and the right edge do not?
It is a rhetorical question, but is that a natural plank cross section?

I think this is a simple misunderstanding of what is visible in the images.

1) There is some black marring (tarmac oils/track rubber) down the centerline which gives the illusion of the wear only taking place along the center line. However, if you look closely, the entire plank is worn. Look at the curved edges near the bolt holes (yellow arrows) on the outer edge of the plank on the the right side. Tricky to spot in 2D photo but the curved edges are the result of the plank wear on left and right edges.




2) If you take a piece of wood and fasten it down at several locations with bolts, the area in the immediate vicinity of the bolt holes will be "sunken in" due to the clamping pressure of the bolt. As an example, look at the stress pattern arising in a metal plate from bolt clamp pressure:

.

The area in the immediate vicinity of the bolt is inset due to the clamping pressure. That's why there are "light patches" immediately in the surrounding area of each bolt hole. This is particularly visible down the left hand side of the floor. These circled regions (blue circle) do not wear as much because they are slightly above the reference plane due to deformation from the bolt pressure.




3) No track surface is perfectly flat. So even if the plank is perfectly flat, it will not skim the circuit in a perfectly flat manner. Furthermore, even if the track was perfectly flat, the car has a non-zero pitch angle meaning the plank will not fully contact the track surface in a uniform way. The car is always at some non-zero pitch and roll angle due to bumps, suspension movement, and so on. Uniform wear is an impossibility.

[SiLo]

...

I thought the black bit was where there was less wear, rather than the other way around? Or am I mistaken?