Red Bull RB9 Renault

[trinidefender]

Does anybody have any pictures from behind which might show the underside of the beamwing?

[theWPTformula]

Okay I think I've found something. Interestingly, this actually cropped up in this thread back in February.

Below is a picture of Mark Webber's RB9 at Jerez. Look closely at the junction where the beam wing meets the rear wing endplate and you can see a small opening highlighted in a red circle.



Having looked at other images of beneath the central section of the beam wing I can't see any openings beneath the position of the support.

Could the support be a duct for airflow to pass through the beam wing and stall the tips of it? This is what they did with their DDRS last year only they used openings in the rear wing endplates when DRS was open.

This could effectively be DRD for the beam wing. SomersF1 said that this could be a possibility at the beginning of the season. Instead of drawing air from a separate source, the system can simply use hot air from within the engine cover. It could be passed through the swan neck support as low pressure builds up beneath the beam wing, so it could still be having a "straw" effect as mentioned earlier.

[Owen.C93]

Firstly that's a preexisting hole similar to the slots in the rear wing near the edges (you can see daylight through it). And secondly the hot air exit isn't that high pressure and wouldn't be of much use for a blown slot. It made sense for the DDRS because it was an incredibly simple and fool proof system. Not a lot of gain but you could hand over the work to some intern and see results. If they were capable of operating a proper passive fluid switch then they would probably have run it on their rear wing more than once or twice.

The beam wing support is probably thick to reduce the amount of wobble in the rear wing. They may even be using the connection between the floor and rear wing endplates and support for the floor and not as support of the rear wing. This allows them to remove the support between the diffuser and gearbox so they can mount it higher for their big ducts and instead attach the diffuser to the rear wing end plates and have them pull down onto the beam wing support. Which would explain the thickness needed.

[aral]

I have a theory on the flexi floor of the red bull. Could it be that when the driver sits in the car the weight of him engages some kind of mechanism that is attached to the rod at the front of the floor to pull up.

Is it April the first already?

[Just_a_fan]

I looks like it is a good 6" wide. A support purely of carbon fibre laminate wouldn't have to be that thick or even close to that. Are there any other pictures of this piece at a different angle.

I'm sure they could have made it narrower by making it taller - indeed it would be much better if it were taller as that would increase the lever arm resisting the turning moment created by the upper rear wing. But making the support taller would also impede flow to the centre section of the beam wing (where the flap is). It looks like the cooling hole from the rear of the airbox cover is pointed towards the flapped section of beam wing so maybe they've found a small benefit by having a wider but short support for the beam wing that helps direct air in to the flap gap on the centre portion of the beam wing.

[Just_a_fan]

I have a theory on the flexi floor of the red bull. Could it be that when the driver sits in the car the weight of him engages some kind of mechanism that is attached to the rod at the front of the floor to pull up.

Sadly not. The driver has to be very firmly strapped in - any vertical play in the seat would be disconcerting for the driver and possibly dangerous in an accident. The seat has to meet certain extraction requirements in the event of an accident and a mechanism would affect this too. Also, this would be in breach of the rules regarding lack of flexibility. Any such system would be fairly obvious to the stewards when scrutineering the car.

[Jackles-UK]

I have a theory on the flexi floor of the red bull. Could it be that when the driver sits in the car the weight of him engages some kind of mechanism that is attached to the rod at the front of the floor to pull up.

I'm pretty sure that would be highly illegal anyway. However, even if it wasn't, if the floor manages to pass the 100kg load test applied by the FIA then there is no way that the approx 72kg Webber (let alone 65kg Vettel!) would somehow be able to make it flex.

[Tim.Wright]

The seatbelt tensions are typically pretty high. Wouldn't be hard to have the belts operate a little cam which deflects the floor when they are tightened and then springs back when they are released.

[DaveW]

This is interesting, I think (courtesy of McMrocks). The bottom attachment of the splitter stay appears to be hinged. If the stay happens to pass through the tub skin, then anything is possible.

Here was my thought, which has the advantage that is would react against the FIA load test.

[theWPTformula]

This is interesting, I think (courtesy of McMrocks). The bottom attachment of the splitter stay appears to be hinged. If the stay happens to pass through the tub skin, then anything is possible.

Here was my thought, which has the advantage that is would react against the FIA load test.

I do not know the technical regulations off the back of my hand, but I thought that the stay had to be fixed to the tub, so it wouldn't be able to pass through it.

Pretty cool idea though. It would work very well with the rake angle of the car, too.

[raymondu999]

[Jonnycraig]

Interesting that he persists with the tea tray temperature. As seen in Abu Dhabi, it was registering at the same temperature as the track - 40-50C.

[CBeck113]

Interesting that he persists with the tea tray temperature. As seen in Abu Dhabi, it was registering at the same temperature as the track - 40-50C.

But from who's car did the pictrues come? Weber's maybe?

As for the hinge, I believe that the floors are not allowed to flex downward, but need to be flexible when they drive over the curbs (i.e. upward), so they need a certain degree of freedom. A fixed support in this location would lead to failures (look at the pictures of MW's RB9 on the hook - the scratches stop where the floor meets the chassis). At first though upward flexing in this area would be a disadvantage, but this would reduce the wear on the floor board, allowing it to be set up lower to the ground.

[dxpetrov]

Funny how stupid FIA react to journalists observations instead of having their own people to monitor the teams and their developments.

[trinidefender]

Interesting that he persists with the tea tray temperature. As seen in Abu Dhabi, it was registering at the same temperature as the track - 40-50C.

But from who's car did the pictrues come? Weber's maybe?

As for the hinge, I believe that the floors are not allowed to flex downward, but need to be flexible when they drive over the curbs (i.e. upward), so they need a certain degree of freedom. A fixed support in this location would lead to failures (look at the pictures of MW's RB9 on the hook - the scratches stop where the floor meets the chassis). At first though upward flexing in this area would be a disadvantage, but this would reduce the wear on the floor board, allowing it to be set up lower to the ground.

This is exactly what has been discussed as one of the main topics for the last 10 or so pages. We were all talking about the floor bending up not down. Don't want to be a dick about it but read back.