Flexi - Wings are the hot topic today

AFAIU the rules don't allow deflection, it's the way the FIA scrutinise that 'allows' some movement of aerodynamic devices.

They are pretty much all British based teams; Red Bull is based in Milton Keynes.

 

No, they meet the current FIA tests.

 

Flexi wing technology has been around for years and subsequently banned so the FIA know full well how to write the rules to avoid such a situation. Red Bull seem to be (past) masters in the art of side stepping attempts by the FIA to stop it, so hats off to them.

However when Ferrari circumvented the rules with "fuelflow gate" and gained a distinct advantage then everyone complained even though the car passed all the pit lane and sensor tests.

The bodywork flexing under the technical regulations are not adequate as they should have loads applied to the front and rear wings = to the downforce created by them. A simple sensor measuring the full load at (say)140mph should then be applied under static conditions.

The 1000N and 500N loads are not adequate given the amount of stress these items can take!

or

just let them get on with it and keep the current load test under rules - This is my option.


The killer rule under the FIA 2021 Technical Regulations is this:-

3.9.9 In order to ensure that the requirements of Article 3.8 are respected, the FIA reserves the right to introduce further load/deflection tests on any part of the bodywork which appears to be (or is suspected of), moving whilst the car is in motion.

Game over, we decide if we want to tie your hand behind your back again!!

Tony

 

If some cars are suspected of not respecting the rules, obviously its the job of the FIA to bring them into line.

Reinforcing a component by applying more layers of carbon fiber during contruction to stop it flexing doesn't cost $1/1M.

It doesn' need a complete redesign, can be done very quickly, and without adding much weight either.

 

For me the FIA are fighting a losing battle over this, they can carry out as many rule changes as they like but they will not stop flexi wings, its a massive industry now especially in the aeronautical industry. Look up flexible aircraft aeroelasticity. I seem to recall Red Bull employed some top geeks (or University) some time ago to look into this very unique science. To stop it you must subject the wing test to the max load the cars downforce will generate.

I think its much easier than just adding a few more layers, carbon fibre can be created / constructed / weaved to behave very differently under varying conditions, so its just a matter of how the carbon is laid up to induce a adaptive change. ie flex!

I remember Colin Chapman (remarkable engineer) thought of the idea back in the seventies (Lotus 72 i think) where he put a rubber bush in the rear wing structure that compressed under load, it passed the static test but allowed the wing angle to change at high speed.

 

As if FIA checking F1 car regulations through testing is intended to stop industry research?

I do think the regulations should be aimed more towards allowing flexible (or active) aerodynamic devices (some roadcars are more advanced in this respect than F1 cars), but I really don't get the hysteria around the RB case. Maybe it is because Mercedes pointed it out, and Mercedes are the dominant team so they have to shut up and all teams which cannot build a faster car should be allowed a sneaky here and there.

 

Rules don’t allow deflection and the laws of physics don’t allow total rigidity, so the question becomes just how much deflection is tolerated. This is answered by the regulations which prescribe a maximum deflection and which all cars comply with.

Obviously every team will want to get as close as possible to the maximum allowed deflection, either for weight saving, aero advantage (or no aero disadvantage) or both—just as Merc does with their super flex front wing.

No kidding, I thought they were based in Africa
Point being, for years, whenever a Brit team came up with a “clever” interpretation of the rules that contravened the intent or spirit of the rule, they were always defended in the Brit press by arguing that all that mattered was the regulation as written. Now, of course, the Brit driver HAM trumps the Brit team RBR (and its foreign driver as well as the foreign teams with their flex wings) for the Brit press’ support, hence all the hubris being raised on the subject.

 

Perhaps whoever wrote this should read on further in the technical regulations and look at article 3.9

3.9.9 In order to ensure that the requirements of Article 3.8 are respected, the FIA reserves the right to introduce further load/deflection tests on any part of the bodywork which appears to be (or is suspected of), moving whilst the car is in motion.

From my perspective the FIA are the regulatory body and the stewards are the police, the stewards dont make the regulations......furthermore

2.1 Role of the FIA :
The following technical regulations for Formula One cars are issued by the FIA.

2.2 Amendments to the regulations :
These Technical Regulations apply to the Championship taking place in the calendar year referred to in the title (“the Championship”) and may only be changed after 30 April of the preceding year with the unanimous agreement of all competitors, save for changes made by the FIA for safety reasons which may come into effect without notice or delay.

2.3 Dangerous construction :
The stewards may exclude a vehicle whose construction is deemed to be dangerous.

2.4 Compliance with the regulations :
Automobiles must comply with these regulations in their entirety at all times during an Event.
Should a competitor introduce a new design or system or feel that any aspect of these regulations is unclear, clarification may be sought from the FIA Formula One Technical Department. If clarification relates to any new design or system, correspondence must include:
a) A full description of the design or system.
b) Drawings or schematics where appropriate.
c) The competitor's opinion concerning the immediate implications on other parts of the car of any proposed new design.
d) The competitor's opinion concerning any possible long term consequences or new developments which may come from using any such new designs or systems.
e) The precise way or ways in which the competitor feels the new design or system will enhance the performance of the car.

2.5 New systems or technologies :
Any new system, procedure or technology not specifically covered by these regulations, but which is deemed permissible by the FIA Formula One Technical Department, will only be admitted until the end of the Championship during which it is introduced. Following this the Formula One Commission will be asked to review the technology concerned and, if they feel it adds no value to Formula One in general, it will be specifically prohibited.
Any team whose technology is prohibited in this way will then be required to publish full technical details of the relevant system or procedure.

2.6 Measurements :
All measurements must be made while the car is stationary on a flat horizontal surface.

They kind of shoot themselves in the foot by stating all measurements should be stationary, they can easily measure wing flex on the move....simple.

Pretty much all current F! technology comes from outside of F!, areoelasticity is a classic example.

Tony

 

But the cars do conform to the rules. FIA says no flection beyond xyz using our tests. All current cars have passed this test. Merc and their cronies want the test changed (so obviously, this gets done).

Yes in theory reinforcing is quite simple, but you don't want your wing to lose performance. It has to be redesigned. Quite simple really. They don't do that for 2 bob and 6 pence .

 

Actually the regulations do allow deflection, they have to otherwise you will get fatigue failure, the contentious point is that the load tests of about 100kg and 50kg applied are not enough.

When the car is travelling at 150mph those are exceeded considerably. At around 90mph the car can generate its own weight in downforce, possibly over 700kg so the FIA test should reflect that.

The Merc front wing deflection is just taking the piss, i would put that under the heading of variable geometry

As for the British press, who takes any notice of any of them!

 

I think the whole car concept has to change, hence the high rake angle of the RB and other teams. Mercs are low rake and hence cannot take full advantage of rear wing flexing although their front wing seems to make up for that. I wouldnt call that flexing, more akin to a variable aero device.
Tony

 

Are there new tests for the front wing too?

 

The disagreement is that the present test isn't fit for purpose to check if the cars conform to the rules.

If the method is inadequate, obviously the test is meaningless and the rules open to abuse.

But you keep seeing a Mercedes conspiracy everywhere.

 

In the past, Toto would just fund a new rear wing design but with the budget cap in place he decided to go on the offensive and not only save the expense of a new rear wing design—which I suspect has more to do with the controlled flexibility of the swan neck attachment—but to force that cost onto his competitors.

Also, at the same time as the competitors are busy redesigning the rear wing they can’t also be trying to copy his flexy front wing.

 

AFAIK - No but there could be unintended consequences of the Mercedes clarification.

 

I just have my eyes open and I see an awful lot of FIA activity ''clamping down'' on all of Mercedes' rivals and little to no activity on just about anything Mercedes does.

 

Not only not clamping down on but also aiding and abetting as they did last year when Tombazis clearly stated they advised Merc to actuate their DAS system through the steering wheel. This way, the FIA could deem the cheat acceptable even though this clearly contravenes the parc-fermé rules of not being able to change the car’s suspension settings after qualifying.

Furthermore, recognizing that the device was a cheat the FIA allowed its continued use for the whole year and only banned it for 2021 onward. Compare that with what is being considered for the flexy wings.

 

Exactly right! It is quite a bizarre situation but it's ok, I've been ensured my tinfoil hat is glued down on my head...

 

Yes, but only by the foremost purveyor of pretzel logic—twisted to conform to his agenda—on this forum, so not to worry.

 

William has finally blown his cover - he works at Red Bull.

Go on then - what is the actual cost ?

 

Maybe because Mercedes does everything right?

 

Yeah, you wouldn't be paranoid if they weren't all out to get you.

 

AMuS

After the announcement of stricter controls, Red Bull has to change its rear wing. Newey says the rear wing correction will cost them half a million dollars. In return, Red Bull is now pushing the FIA to also tighten the tests for the front wings. Their target: Mercedes.

Red Bull firmly expects the FIA to tighten the tests for the front wing too now. And what does it cost to build a new front wing? Horner: "More than half a million. Well, according to our standards."


https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/formel-1/red-bull-mercedes-streit-flexible-front-fluegel/