Formula None wrote:
shelly wrote:forty-two wrote:
In my opinion, RBR have set up their car such that when stationary, their angle of rake is such that the "reference plane" is pointing down into the ground, meaning that they can "legally" have their wing scrape the ground.
The point, as richrad leeds and hters wrote, is that with current regulation on dimensions even in high rake attitude you can not get the front wing so low without some non rigid part somewhere (tea tray, or nose or front wing or all of them).
All these parts are subject to flexibility test and rbr are fully compliant.
Was just running a few basic CAD angles and found that rake angle thing may not be entirely impossible to discount.
As seen in the image, the splitter is about an inch off the ground.
Splitter being the reference, the front wing will be 85 mm above the reference line.
(assumed car length as 5 m)
Considering no rake angle (plank is flat), rear wheel axle as the pivot line, as the splitter starts to bottom out, the front wing will be 34 mm lower or 50 mm above the road surface.
Adding for the 10 mm deformation with 200 kg loading the wing will be 40 mm off the road surface.
If the rake angle story of RBR is to be believed and they are running an additional 25 mm at the rear, the front wing will be just 35 mm off the ground. Adding for deformation front wing will be down to 25 mm off the ground. At the rear the center step of the car will be 50 mm off the ground.
Which is what is seen in RBR front and rear.
).
