Groups

Red Bull’s front wings ”aren’t flexing” (92 posts)

Viewing post 46 to 60 (92 total posts)

← 1 … 3 4 5 … 7 →

Scribe said 2 years, 1 month ago:

I don’t belive either the raking or the flexing nose means the wing tips arn’t still flexing downwards in relation to the wing supports, because I belive you can watch most videos of the RB7, or see the pictures, and the wing edges are bent downwards from the centre.

It’s a conveniant smokescreen for RBR, the rake will be a way of activaiting things all over the car, an presumably making the bendy nose and wings flex even more. That the rake effects the referance plane, presumably legaly is again as irrelavant as RBR passing one test proving their wings arn’t flexing, when we can see that they are.

#
Movement said 2 years, 1 month ago:

For any of those interested…I have just read a theory on another site which seems very interesting. I am not sure how correct it is, but it seems to make alot of sense, somehow. Its fairly similar to what a few of you have commented above, but a little clearer.

Basically, the Red Bull, as we all know, has a more pronounced rake than the other cars. That is to say, the angle of the floor is steeper than the competitor’s cars. This means that the reference plane, (imaginary by the time it is under the nose) would actually be under the ground when it was level with the front wing. So although the front wing is flexing (and I know that is an entirely separate legal issue) it is still above the reference plane at all times.

Having said that, as most of us have agreed here the flexing of any bodywork is not permitted, and so that is a separate question to the one of the reference plane. But interesting nonetheless.

#
Funkyf1 said 2 years, 1 month ago:

Zzzzzzzz, even Chuck Norris can’t beat Adrian Newey. As Ross Brawn mentioned early this season it’s the entire concept of the car, not just wing that creates this situation of flexing, sorry to offend, but I’m sure Ross is more knowable and informed than any of us forum readers/writers. It’s simple, the FIA pass it, so it’s legal, time to let it go people.

#
Fer no.65 said 6 months, 2 weeks ago:

Now, again, it’s time fooooooooor:

“THE RED BULL FLEXI WING THREAD ! :D”

http://www.gaiaconscience.com/img/trucorb2.gif

Just seen a retweet by Scarbs with a gif. Have a look at how much the nosecone moves up and down. It looks like rubber, I’ve never seen a car behave like that.

#
Prisoner Monkeys said 6 months, 2 weeks ago:

It’s probably deforming with the shock of going over the kerbs. And the dud colouring of the .gif makes it a little hard to tell.

But if it is flexing, it will doubltess pass all of the FIA load tests. It’s a joke that they can’t penalise teams for having parts that visibly flex simply because they pass the load tests.

#
ajokay said 6 months, 2 weeks ago:

Then maybe the rule should be that if the wing is seen to be flexing, which it clearly has been many times, then it is flexing and is therefore illegal.

#
Prisoner Monkeys said 6 months, 2 weeks ago:

The problem with that is that it relies on a purely subjective means of assessment. The load tests were introduced to be objective; a measurable system of moitoring the wings that teams could not argue with if they failed the tests. Given that Red Bull have an explanation for everything, how long do you think it would take for them to explain this away?

#
Toro Stevo said 6 months, 2 weeks ago:

As has been said here already it’s impossible to make a part that does not flex. Every single front wing in the paddock will flex, it’s just a matter of how much. If the wording refers to any movement of the front wing, then it’s a stupid regulation as the designers cannae change the laws of physics.

Hence as PM said, they introduce a measure of how much flex is allowed. This measure is also dynamic, and they increase the test where they see fit. If a car passes then it passes, and teams moaning about it would be better served finding their own solution.

#
Fer no.65 said 6 months, 2 weeks ago:

@prisoner-monkeys Maybe the whole thing flexes, instead of just the wing. The way FIA tests the cars is very limited, as with every experiment, and it varies quite a lot from reality. The test FIA imposes is very simple, and it used to be even simpler.

I guess the load varies so much that the Red Bull guys found a better way to make it flex. I’ve just seen on the telly a similar shot of Maldonado, going very aggressively over the kerbs, and the wing flexed quite a lot, but not the nosecone, as in Red Bull’s case.

#
Prisoner Monkeys said 6 months, 2 weeks ago:

Every single front wing in the paddock will flex, it’s just a matter of how much.

I think it’s more a question of the intended effects of the flexing. Some of the parts are clearly designed to flex under certain conditions so as to gain an advantage – and that’s where the problem lies.

#
raymondu999 said 6 months, 2 weeks ago:

Thought this was relevant – Maybe @keithcollantine would find it interesting too. Look at the section of nose (and cameras) when the mechanic takes the old set off.

Remember: Don’t just look at the camera winglets, look at the yellow nose too. Rewind a few times if you have to.

#
Keith Collantine said 6 months, 2 weeks ago:

@raymondu999 You mean the way it twists when the mechanic grabs it? Curious, though he had bashed that nose twice by this point though, so could it be damage-related?

#
Mallesh Magdum said 6 months, 2 weeks ago:

i saw it during the race too, i thought the mechanic lifted the car

#
Tom Haxley said 6 months, 2 weeks ago:

Looks almost like rubber on the end of it???

#
raymondu999 said 6 months, 2 weeks ago:

@keithcollantine possible – but I don’t get how it can be structurally weakened to be able to twist at a mechanic’s hand strength, while only deflecting (off the top of my head) 1cm under 100kg – surely the mechanic’s hand is applying less than 100kg of force…

#