Renault Sport F1 R.S.17

[Thunder]

Don't know if this is the new Wing, but these Picures are from today by AMuS:

[jonas_linder]

Are there any shots of their new (now legal) rear wing?

This one is from f1fanatic.co.uk, great quality!



Compared to day one last week,



Looks very similar!

[AnthonyG]

I think it's the same wing.

[matt21]

The Renault rear wing support has been deemed as illegal and they have to alter if before Melbourne. Apparently it is too far forward and does not meet the mainplane as required.

'Article 3.9.6 of F1's technical regulations states that the support must be extended until it meets the area of the regulations that is related to the area of the rear wing main plane as defined in article 3.9.1. '

It's a technicality - Renault bolted the pylon to the drs mechanism, which is then attached to the mainplane.
The regs imply that the pylon should attach directly to the mainplane, but are not specific - they found a loophole.

But McLaren seems to have done a similar thing.

[Thunder]

McLaren (and most others) have connected their Rear Wong to the Pylon holding the DRS Mechanism. If you look further up you will find Pictures where the Renault RW Pylon is connected to the DRS housing. I guess they went a little too far in that Area.

[PhillipM]

Poor wording in the regulations to be honest, it is, after all, connected to the mainplane, it's just the DRS unit happens to be part of it too. Make one part do two things, golden rule of engineering

[matt21]

[Goran2812]

Some shots I took today...

[Enstone]

[Morteza]

Via @thisisgambi

[Thunder]

There is the now legal RW Pylon:

[Sevach]

[PhillipM]

FIA really shot themself in the foot with that interpretation. They've turned it into a murky grey line instead of black and white.

[matt21]

There is the now legal RW Pylon:
https://imgr2.auto-motor-und-sport.de/N ... 042649.jpg

Does this make any difference? And if yes, what is the benefit of the original Renault solution.
For me it doesn´t really matter, and as a designer I wouldn´t put too much of effort there.

[Moose]

There is the now legal RW Pylon:
https://imgr2.auto-motor-und-sport.de/N ... 042649.jpg

Does this make any difference? And if yes, what is the benefit of the original Renault solution.
For me it doesn´t really matter, and as a designer I wouldn´t put too much of effort there.

I mean, swan neck wing mounts are known to be more efficient for a good reason - thy don't interupt the flow of air underneath the wing at the wing mounts.

The further away from the wing you can place the mount, the less disturbance you get, and the more efficient the wing becomes.

Clearly Renault thought it was a good design to go for in the first place, and something tells me that they have rather more evidence behind their decision than a guy in an armchair looking at the finished product.