Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
It should not matter if the wing passes the static load test. What should matter is that the space between the flap and the main plane, should not increase or decrease at any point on track.
It should not matter if the wing passes the static load test. What should matter is that the space between the flap and the main plane, should not increase or decrease at any point on track.
But the FIA are controlling it with a static load test, against which the technical teams are designing, specifying and testing themselves.
The "gate" has been left open, there's inadequate control in reality.
I dont think there are any static load tests that pull ‘up’ on the DRS flap when closed. Only test I’m aware of is the slot gap of 85mm with the roller thing (one that Lewis was caught out with in 2021)
It should not matter if the wing passes the static load test. What should matter is that the space between the flap and the main plane, should not increase or decrease at any point on track.
But the FIA are controlling it with a static load test, against which the technical teams are designing, specifying and testing themselves.
The "gate" has been left open, there's inadequate control in reality.
I do question what will happen if after saying they'll change it Mclaren(or any other team) showed up with something in that vein.
Are they updating the tests?
I think McLaren can be very happy. They had a P2, double podium and a win with an obviously illegal wing which gave them a decent benefit in the race on all 3 tracks
They're not doing a good job at policing this, are they?
In terms of efficacy, the FIA have moved far quicker now than they did in 2021 when they let a development race for a further 3 events that ultimately led to a championship win.
I read that Mclaren gained 3 km/h speed in the straights thanks to the tricky DRS. That would be at least 0.2 seconds advantage per lap, and now it's no more.
But they are still looking very fast. Consistently faster then the Redbull team that's in turmoil.
We have an all-time winner here, absolute legend of taking 10% of available information and making up a story around it! Of all the nonsense Gary A wrote, this one's out head and shoulders above the rest
A small reflection not related to raisingflaptipsgate.
This is about rear wings sitting on a flexible mount (they all do it to different extents), tilting backwards... and forwards?
I'll try to illustrate with some hopefully representative numbers, but warning: numbers taken out of derriere. Numbers might be dirty or smelly, even wrong. Hopefully they illustrate the point and someone more familiar with the actual numbers can provide any necesary adjustments.
So, rear wing aseemblies tilt back at speed due to drag. Say 400 kg of drag at 300 km/h? (I know, I should use N). That aseembly, the rear wing, is a 30 kg object sitting at the end of a cantilever. Drag pushes it back, and the whole thing tilts from where it joins the chasis and flexes along its stands. End result: less angle of attack and less drag.
Now, if the rear wing's drag is 400 kg at 300 km/h, it might be like 100 kg at 150 km/h.
That's just drag. That's what we always talk about when it comes to rear wings bending backwards and losing angle of attack.
But now look at that same 30 kg object, suspended at the end of a lever, under braking. 5g braking (300 km/h?) that is 150 kg pushing the wings mass forwards relative to the car. The drag still wins, but only by 250 kg.
3.5 g braking? Is that what happens at 150 km/h? That's 105 kg. So it cancels the drag. The wing is now back in the position it was when we looked at all those pictures in the pits on thursday. The wing is not experiencing less backwards force than at speed, instead it is experiencing no net force at all in that direction (only under braking).
Now brake at 100 km/h, and suddenly drag on the wing is about 45 kg, but inertia forces from braking on the wing are about 80 kg. And the wing is being pushed, for tha brief (but lap time critical) moment, forwards.
It is on this cantilever, it tilts as it moves forwards, so it follows that its angle of attack of the wing would increase for that brief moment, when the air is slower and thus less prone to separating. Higher angle of attack -> more downforce.
One could argue that the actual design of the wing is not the angle at which it sits in the pits, but the angle at which it sits in its more function critical speed, arguably between 150 and 200 km/h. And that might well happen to be the same as in the pits! And if we look at that as its "default" position...
...now we are not just looking at top speed gains at terminal speed coming from that cantilever flexibility, but also at downforce gains at the slowest corners.
