Red Bull RB22

[edu2703]

What it seems to me is that while Ferrari's mechanism rotates the wing clockwise, Red Bull's rotates the wing anticlockwise.

[Stu]

…and certainly the gearbox needs to be sorted out as well because those are the 2 areas that the drivers seem to be complaining about and struggling with. The huge amounts of understeer is horrible.

Is it gearbox that they are complaining about or the gear shifts?

Where do the gear shifts take place?

Gear shifting is impacted by how the MGU-K is operated; in the previous rule set MV often complained about the quality of downshifting & and was frequently coached by GP on settings to alleviate it.

[SiLo]

This version of the wing uses a central actuator, I guess if most of the drag loss is from the inversion of the wing this is actually the simpler solution surely? Ferrari are having issues having only a single actuator on one side and having to balance it on the other.

[carisi2k]

Is it gearbox that they are complaining about or the gear shifts?

Where do the gear shifts take place?

Gear shifting is impacted by how the MGU-K is operated; in the previous rule set MV often complained about the quality of downshifting & and was frequently coached by GP on settings to alleviate it.

KERS is then part of the gearbox and so the connection between engine, gearbox and KERS needs to be fixed. This update for Miami is almost a B revision with front wing, rear wing, sidepods, halo winglet and reduced weight.

[carisi2k]

Well they are clearly running two different wings, one with the McLaren-style side winglet and one looks like the old spec without it. We can gather these are from the same test because both have the new sidepod.

Also allegedly a new rear wing opening mechanism (not the same as Ferrari). I can't tell on that one.

Red Bull had a tyre test in Suzuka and then the camera day at Silverstone during this break.

[Brahmal]

What it seems to me is that while Ferrari's mechanism rotates the wing clockwise, Red Bull's rotates the wing anticlockwise.

I think you're correct, as that's the only way the central actuator arms could work without clipping. Downside could be a stronger parachute effect during actuation than Ferrari. The ends are mounted on small swing-arms to increase the size of the opening. It all looks a bit delicate no?

It appears to be a different and more complex mechanism than Ferrari's. Very curious to see how it works.

It certainly has more moving parts and seems like a bit of a contraption. Ferrari's actuators seem like the bigger engineering challenge though, and probably weigh more.

[matteosc]

This version of the wing uses a central actuator, I guess if most of the drag loss is from the inversion of the wing this is actually the simpler solution surely? Ferrari are having issues having only a single actuator on one side and having to balance it on the other.

I think Ferrari has one actuator per side. Removing the central actuator is in general beneficial for efficiency, both open and closed. It is all a matter of how small and reliable the side actuators are.

[SilviuAgo]

[matteosc]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HGgjbXtWkAA ... ame=medium

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HGgl_CLW4AA ... me=240x240

This seems a normal rear wing. Pretty confused about these pictures. Are we sure they are not from two separate events?

[SilviuAgo]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HGgjbXtWkAA ... ame=medium

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HGgl_CLW4AA ... me=240x240

This seems a normal rear wing. Pretty confused about these pictures. Are we sure they are not from two separate events?

About Red bull's flip flop wing (at Silverstone today) it's certainly a lot more different from Ferrari's “Macarena” wing.

There's central actuator present, plus the small elements which make the upper part of the wing stay opened higher(which reduces even more gap than normally, seems more than Ferrari's). But there's something else that actually got me wondering.

The upper part of the wing seems to me way too short for it to be able to fully close when it's turned off. That is just based on this photo. Compare its length to the amount of gap created when it opened. Ferrari's macarena wing for example was a lot longer than this one. Maybe this one is also closing differently?

[nico5]

What it seems to me is that while Ferrari's mechanism rotates the wing clockwise, Red Bull's rotates the wing anticlockwise.

And how would it not hit the actuator? Maybe it's made of ghost matter, who knows

[SiLo]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HGgjbXtWkAA ... ame=medium

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HGgl_CLW4AA ... me=240x240

This seems a normal rear wing. Pretty confused about these pictures. Are we sure they are not from two separate events?

About Red bull's flip flop wing (at Silverstone today) it's certainly a lot more different from Ferrari's “Macarena” wing.

There's central actuator present, plus the small elements which make the upper part of the wing stay opened higher(which reduces even more gap than normally, seems more than Ferrari's). But there's something else that actually got me wondering.

The upper part of the wing seems to me way too short for it to be able to fully close when it's turned off. That is just based on this photo. Compare its length to the amount of gap created when it opened. Ferrari's macarena wing for example was a lot longer than this one. Maybe this one is also closing differently?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HGnF1mMbAAA ... ame=medium

My guess is that it rotates counter clockwise (if you were looking from the side and the car was driving from right to left). So the actuator arm is actually pushing the upper flaps and it's rotating about that connection point.

The sides of the flaps are then connected by a longer arm, they likely extend farther down the side of the wing endplate than you have drawn.

[Lasssept]

updt.
AI ?


link

[Farnborough]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HGpYaYdbIAA ... ame=medium
link

You can juuust make out what looks like tge pivot point of "bell-crank" arrangement in the side mount of wing.

The front most item (lighter in shade) looks to be a ram and possibly pneumatic and pulling downward to deploy , upward to retract the wing in return to downforce position. Thst in addition to central primary control mechanical facility.

Doesn't look particularly complex, more a nice rational interpretation of that flip stance concept, designed with pre assessment of Ferrari etc.

Looks eminently functional, and particularly allowing the return phase to be completed in shortest time frame , also whilst promoting airflow reatachment in more beneficial .... less ambivalent .... fashion.

[djos]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HGpYaYdbIAA ... ame=medium
link

This looks more elegant than the Ferrari solution. Ferrari’s actuators take up some space that reduces the rear wing width.