Flexiwings 2024

[organic]

This is wild (the second tweet on the bottom):

Wow this second tweet..... The sped up clip of the wing flexing is outrageous

[bluechris]

Any team protested this or they all sleeping?

[101FlyingDutchman]

What picture are you looking at? Just so we can all comment the same thing.

Literally scroll up 3 posts. The diagram Luscion posted

Ok, would you mind explaining your reasoning then? I see less DRS delta by 4kph. You take this and think they have a worse wing. Do you perhaps think they should open DRS more to make up for the fact that it's already a bit open to begin with?

Wasn’t me with any reasoning! But some seem to suggest that the twist increases the DRS gap in the corners and therefore it’s an unfair advantage. But clearly it isn’t as straightforward as that.
IMHO the leading edge of the low flap section probably also “twists up” at high speed when the total assembly canters backwards. Clearly the flow field isn’t as straightforward as the “DRS gain” doesn’t seem to be any bigger and in fact possibly smaller than other teams.
Whether the total deflection of the whole assembly is legal or not? I carry no opinion. It passes current testing regs and all teams are always at extracting the maximum out of regulation sets. I see a very intricate clever design that clearly meets all design requirements.
Perhaps the only thing would be the DRS Gap increasing ever so slightly but please refer to the first part of this reply for why I’m doubtful

[organic]

Literally scroll up 3 posts. The diagram Luscion posted

Ok, would you mind explaining your reasoning then? I see less DRS delta by 4kph. You take this and think they have a worse wing. Do you perhaps think they should open DRS more to make up for the fact that it's already a bit open to begin with?

Wasn’t me with any reasoning! But some seem to suggest that the twist increases the DRS gap in the corners and therefore it’s an unfair advantage. But clearly it isn’t as straightforward as that.
IMHO the leading edge of the low flap section probably also “twists up” at high speed when the total assembly canters backwards. Clearly the flow field isn’t as straightforward as the “DRS gain” doesn’t seem to be any bigger and in fact possibly smaller than other teams.
Whether the total deflection of the whole assembly is legal or not? I carry no opinion. It passes current testing regs and all teams are always at extracting the maximum out of regulation sets. I see a very intricate clever design that clearly meets all design requirements.
Perhaps the only thing would be the DRS Gap increasing ever so slightly but please refer to the first part of this reply for why I’m doubtful

There is some fault to this logic. If you improve the coefficient of drag of your 'closed' DRS position without affecting the DRS 'open' drag, then the DRS delta will be smaller. So if we're looking at this data, if anything it suggests that something could be going on which gains them 3-4 km/h with DRS closed

No doubt this behaviour improves the efficiency of the wing with DRS closed, otherwise it would not be happening. The DRS flap no longer lines up with the wingtip corners. Doesn't that simply indicate the DRS flap is rotating/flexing?

[SoulPancake13]

Any team protested this or they all sleeping?

The guys at formu1a uno have said that Red Bull and Ferrari noticed it and are studying it. Likely will understand it and then make a complaint - if the FIA does nothing about it like they did w flexi front wing then they will implement their own

[chrisc90]

Any team protested this or they all sleeping?

The guys at formu1a uno have said that Red Bull and Ferrari noticed it and are studying it. Likely will understand it and then make a complaint - if the FIA does nothing about it like they did w flexi front wing then they will implement their own

Least the teams have noted it. Hopefully they can protest it.



DOes anyone have any footage of 'slower' races?

[101FlyingDutchman]

Ok, would you mind explaining your reasoning then? I see less DRS delta by 4kph. You take this and think they have a worse wing. Do you perhaps think they should open DRS more to make up for the fact that it's already a bit open to begin with?

Wasn’t me with any reasoning! But some seem to suggest that the twist increases the DRS gap in the corners and therefore it’s an unfair advantage. But clearly it isn’t as straightforward as that.
IMHO the leading edge of the low flap section probably also “twists up” at high speed when the total assembly canters backwards. Clearly the flow field isn’t as straightforward as the “DRS gain” doesn’t seem to be any bigger and in fact possibly smaller than other teams.
Whether the total deflection of the whole assembly is legal or not? I carry no opinion. It passes current testing regs and all teams are always at extracting the maximum out of regulation sets. I see a very intricate clever design that clearly meets all design requirements.
Perhaps the only thing would be the DRS Gap increasing ever so slightly but please refer to the first part of this reply for why I’m doubtful

There is some fault to this logic. If you improve the coefficient of drag of your 'closed' DRS position without affecting the DRS 'open' drag, then the DRS delta will be smaller. So if we're looking at this data, if anything it suggests that something could be going on which gains them 3-4 km/h with DRS closed

No doubt this behaviour improves the efficiency of the wing with DRS closed, otherwise it would not be happening

But the drag coefficient reduction for want of a better term, clearly then comes from the backing off from the assembly at high speed. All wings do as you can’t have a rigid state.

Flexi wings have been part and parcel of F1 for years. Holy grail of currently technology (look at the B787 wings in aerospace tech) and a major performance differentiation in this Formula.

The regs have been drafted and re drafted and I have no doubt it’ll be re drafted again. You then come to: define how much is too much as they ALL do it. Seems to me most are utterly clutching at straws to get a team down a peg or two. It’s normal behaviour and I’m not surprised

[browney]

Why don't they use the dots and write a rule about movement as seen by a camera in a given position?

Wings that pass the static rest but flex in action have been part of F1 for decades.

[FNTC]

FIA are so inconsistent. Aston got banned last year, but as long as Merc and MCL fights Red Bull they ignore this.

[saviour stivala]

The ends of the Mclaren RW clearly bend at speed increasing the gap to the main plan which in turn reduces drag resulting in higher top speeds, but as is it passes the static compliance test/s, so it is cleared to race.

[FNTC]

[Sevach]

Least the teams have noted it. Hopefully they can protest it.



DOes anyone have any footage of 'slower' races?

Zandvoort would be an interesting one, since they brought new wings there.

[chrisc90]

Least the teams have noted it. Hopefully they can protest it.



DOes anyone have any footage of 'slower' races?

Zandvoort would be an interesting one, since they brought new wings there.

Might go back and have a look. Straight and Zandvoort is long
Of course - got to hope we been blessed with some rear wing footage which is rare

[scuderiabrandon]

Least the teams have noted it. Hopefully they can protest it.



DOes anyone have any footage of 'slower' races?

Zandvoort would be an interesting one, since they brought new wings there.

The angle of attack on those wings are too high to have a reasonable view of the movement.

[CrazyCarperF1]

Im not a technical person, the mini drs, It looks like when the rear wing is under full compression/load it sags, the drs activation arm not being attached to the rear wing structure doesnt move so it holds the drs wing in place at the front which makes it look as if the drs is activating when in reality the rest of the rear wing is flexing beneath it. Is this the gist of it.