Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
|
Those pictures of the underside of Mark Webber's car as it was being craned off at Monza seem to have thrown another log on this fire. Apparently a German web site drew attention to the odd wear pattern on Mark's "plank". Rather than being heavily worn at the leading edge, as you'd expect from a car with the high rake angle of the Red Bull, the most noticeable wear seems to be a couple of feet back from the leading edge.
Craig Scarborough has come up with a see-saw mechanism that would allow the leading edge of the splitter to rise (and therefore the front wing to drop closer to the road), which could explain this odd wear pattern: http://scarbsf1.wordpress.com/2011/1...-saw-solution/ Apparently the FIA tests for splitter flex are done with the car resting on its belly, not on the wheels. So the weight of the car would be resting on the back end of the splitter, preventing it tipping up under the FIA test. |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
|
Does the theory fit in with the wear areas we are seeing on the Red Bulls though?
http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/7...0627142031.jpg and the more evenly worn? plank on a Williams for comparison.. http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/739...11016at171.png |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
|
Does the theory fit in with the wear areas we are seeing on the Red Bulls though? |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
|
The FIA have issued a technical directive to the teams clarifying that this splitter design would be illegal:
http://scarbsf1.wordpress.com/2011/1...cal-directive/ |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
|
The FIA have issued a technical directive to the teams clarifying that this splitter design would be illegal: ![]() Ended up costing about $100m ![]() |
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|