RED BULL RB7
The RB7 is a clear evolution of the 2010 World Championship-winning RB6 and exhibits similar aerodynamic traits, as well as the pull rod-actuated rear dampers. The one major difference is the pacakagng of the KERS components, which have been moved rearward to improve the car’s balance
Due to a regulation introduced
for 2011 only, weight distribution was something less of a headache for Newey and his team. The weight distribution of all 2011 cars is fixed at no less than 291kg on the front axle and 342kg on the rear, and with the 640kg minimum weight, teams only had a 7kg window to work with. Other design limitations, such as the c of g height for the engine, also reduced some of the design choices. The result was a clear
evolution of the 2010 World Championship-winning RB6, with many of that car’s concepts carried over, including the high, flat nose and compact rear end, as well as the Renault RS27 2.4-litre V8 engine. ‘The RB5 of 2009 was the first of a new line of cars which come up with the best solution we could find to the big aerodynamic regulation changes,’ says Newey. ‘That was really the biggest regulation change since flat bottoms came in in 1983. We are always trying to maximise the
downforce, have a reasonably broad operating window, get the weight distribution where you want it, have something that is structurally sound, and with a light c of g. It’s all the obvious points, there’s no magic bullet.’ The rear of the car features
pull rod-actuated dampers, which Red Bull re-introduced to Formula 1 on the RB5. The resultant
and general packaging, which we felt suited the new regulations much better than the push rod. It basically allows much tidier flow to the lower beam wing.’ This was the concept Red Bull
attempted to exploit on the RB5, but it ended up being something of a hindrance once the double diffusers emerged. ‘I think with a single diffuser car, pull-rod
The aerodynamic
regulation changes are the biggest since flat bottoms came in in 1983
compact and ‘great’ rear end is the reason why driver Sebastien Vettel has dubbed his RB7 (chassis 03) ‘Kinky Kylie’. Newey, however, takes something of a more reasoned view for the layout: ‘the pull-rod suspension at the rear helped to package some of the major components lower down, so the design was really a combination of c of g height
12
www.racecar-engineering.com • September 2011
suspension is a very elegant solution,’ Newey continues, ‘but for a double diffuser, with the height the diffuser then uses, it’s much less clear cut. It compromised RB5 a little bit by having to try and package a double diffuser onto a car that just wasn’t designed for it. RB6, of course, was designed for the double diffuser, and then we
debated whether to stay with the pull rod or not. I think we elected to because by then we had some experience with it, and were happy with how it worked in general. But equally, had we spotted double diffusers earlier, we may have stayed with push rod for RB5 and RB6. RB7 was always definitely going to be a pull rod because it’s a single diffuser car, by regulation.’ It will likely be said in years
to come that the FIA didn’t quite get the under-body aerodynamic regulations right, as double diffusers gave way to the even more controversial hot blown floors. Most radically, this idea was exploited by Renault with the front exhaust exits seen on the R31. But while Red Bull has tried to optimise the exhaust exits on the RB7, it has not gone as far as a full hot blown diffuser. ‘I think some people were
saying that they hot blow the floors to balance their KERS out, which seems rather against the whole principle of it,’ says Newey. ‘It is meant to be a fuel saving
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100