Red Bull RB8 Renault

[hardingfv32]

Seems a little odd that the other team engineers would not have considered this nose solution before. It is the most direct solution for lowering the FW under aero load.

The team engineers are responsible for drafting new rules, so it would have been easy to control this part of the nose design requirements if they felt it was necessary.

Brian

[vall]

Seems a little odd that the other team engineers would not have considered this nose solution before. It is the most direct solution for lowering the FW under aero load.

The team engineers are responsible for drafting new rules, so it would have been easy to control this part of the nose design requirements if they felt it was necessary.

Brian

No! It is not! Lowering the FW under aero load is forbidden by the regulations, no? It goes "Any device bridging the gap ..... is not allowed"

[vall]

I don't think it actually can due safety precautions; yes red bull took it to the extreme, but a nose cone has to be soft enough to absorb some of the impact force. It'll always flex a little bit, albeit normally you don't get an advantage out of it. Red Bull cleverly managed to design it that way to actually get performance out of it, and the best thing is that the FIA can't just strab rigid test on that without making the nose cone more dangerous.

There is a big difference between a flexible nose, and a flexible covering! The nose cone has to be rigid, as the wing is attached to it, and it must have been crash tested. What RBR has is a sponge type outer covering, something that is permitted under the rules.

hmmmm, from what I can see from the animated GIF on the previous page, the whole structure nose+FW moves up and down. If you were right, then the FW should not move, but only the nose (it's cover).

[aral]

I don't think it actually can due safety precautions; yes red bull took it to the extreme, but a nose cone has to be soft enough to absorb some of the impact force. It'll always flex a little bit, albeit normally you don't get an advantage out of it. Red Bull cleverly managed to design it that way to actually get performance out of it, and the best thing is that the FIA can't just strab rigid test on that without making the nose cone more dangerous.

There is a big difference between a flexible nose, and a flexible covering! The nose cone has to be rigid, as the wing is attached to it, and it must have been crash tested. What RBR has is a sponge type outer covering, something that is permitted under the rules.

hmmmm, from what I can see from the animated GIF on the previous page, the whole structure nose+FW moves up and down. If you were right, then the FW should not move, but only the nose (it's cover).

I posted on the Merc thread the following...... have a look at the rear floor under the car, and look at its relationship to the main leading edge of the fw. Note that there is NO difference in the relationship despite the nose appearing to move. I admit its add, and cannot fully explain what is happening. However, if the wing is static in its relationship with floor of acr, I cannot see how the nose could be bending. Optical anomaly due to heat ??

[alogoc]

what is a "communicating barrels principe"?

[Cam]

Here's an image that suggests the 'hyper' flexing was indeed due to the impact of the DRS sign.

[Cam]

I have been reading on certain sites that the Red Bull nose cone may in fact be made from D3O. This sounds plausible as D3O have ties to Red Bull through certain sports and a quick look their media sites shows references to Red Bull, however not specifically the F1 team. Perhaps worth a deeper look?

D3O materials in their raw state flow freely when moved slowly, but on shock, lock together to absorb and disperse energy, before instantly returning to their flexible state.

This unique characteristic provides enhanced protection, while providing a versatile and flexible material that can be manufactured for a host of impact protective applications.

We manufacture this raw substance into practical functionality, as both a foam and non-foam material. The technology allows freedom of movement for the user with no compromise in comfort or protection.

As the material’s molecules lock, D3O disperses the force of impact, drastically reducing its effect and
minimising the risk of injury or equipment damage.

further info here

[Jackles-UK]

Where is the flex test on the nose actually carried out? If the load test is taken from the tip then there may be some material craziness going on but if it is up closer to the bulkhead then it may be that they have just engineered around the regulations (like their rumoured 2011 see-saw splitter/floor) and created a kind of fulcrum arrangement.

This would also give credence to the pictures that someone posted earlier (can't find it for the life of me!) with an outline drawn around the front of the car from side on showing the tip dropping and, consequently, the FW tilting forward - interestingly the opposite of what McLaren have been experimenting with this year.

[wesley123]

since when is there a load test on the nose in the first place?

[Kiril Varbanov]

Some facts - latest developments on RB8 by G. Piola.

[vall]

since when is there a load test on the nose in the first place?

that's the point! There is no test on the nose. It is only the FW that is tested.

[aral]

since when is there a load test on the nose in the first place?

that's the point! There is no test on the nose. It is only the FW that is tested.

From what I understand, the wing test is carried out with the car resting on supports, and then the load is imposed on the wing. As the wing is rigidly attached to the nose cone, any give in the nose cone would be instantly noticable. In other words, the nose is also being subjected to the same testing loads as the wing.

[elFranZ]

since when is there a load test on the nose in the first place?

that's the point! There is no test on the nose. It is only the FW that is tested.

From what I understand, the wing test is carried out with the car resting on supports, and then the load is imposed on the wing. As the wing is rigidly attached to the nose cone, any give in the nose cone would be instantly noticable. In other words, the nose is also being subjected to the same testing loads as the wing.

Nope.
This has been posted some pages back:



As you can see, there's no car, so depending on where the nose is attached to that support you could notice nothing.

[aral]

As you can see, there's no car, so depending on where the nose is attached to that support you could notice nothing.

OK, granted, but as you can see, the fastening point of the nose cone has to be rigidly fixed.

[mart1n401]

FIA tested only FW bending down, bending test up I will. Is Red Bull not use this hole in the rules?