My solution to the flexi-wings

[Muulka]

Would it be at all possible to attach some sort of strip onto the underside of all front wings that will flash a warning to the FIA if the wing flexes more than is allowed.

It would have to be below the required height for a certain amount of time of course, so that kerbs/bumps, etc. won't set it off.

I think that this would solve the problem of the wings being rigid during scrutineering but running along the ground at high speed.

What do you think?

[marcush.]

why not use a laser beam mounted to the teatray ? you could have a light sensitive cell on the wing and as soon as the two do not match up horizontally more than a specified timespan you get a black flag.
this would also prevent someone trying to have a flexi tray ..

You could have three sensitive cells on the wing-middle (to detect changes in AoA)
and on each end of the wing to detect downward bending ...end of all discussion.

[flynfrog]

why not just allow flexi wings. Its pretty obvious that the engineers have outsmarted the rule makers once again.

[Ciro Pabón]

I think, Flyn, that Withmarsh summed up the problem here, after RedBull "adjusted them" over 1.5 seconds a lap in Hungary last year:

"In truth, we don't understand it but the FIA has to take a view on what's acceptable. If it is acceptable to get the endplates down, then every millimetre represents about a point of downforce, so 25-30mm of vertical lowering of the endplate is about a second, so it's very substantial.

Do I think flexi wings are right in F1? No, I don't. But I'm not the rule maker or interpreter. So we are asking for a clarification on what is permissible and when we have that we will push to do whatever seems to be allowed."

So, in the end, we talk about money. I mean, money for the continuous effort in another field of research that, please tell me, what's worth for.

I would use some kind of vertical wire or plate that cannot be worn during the race, affixed to the front wing or something, as previous posters explained (lasers, reflective patches, whatever is simpler and cheaper).

[flynfrog]

So, in the end, we talk about money. I mean, money for the continuous effort in another field of research that, please tell me, what's worth for.

aeroeleastics are huge right now watch the dream liner on take off see the wing tips curve up this is to simulate a wing end plate but with less drag its far from a dead tech area. [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JV_91Ifwdo[/youtube]

[raymondu999]

I know there are the flex tests where applied a load X newtons the wing is allowed Y mm of flex. But is there actually regulations that out on track, wings are supposed to have at least X mm of clearance with the track?

[flynfrog]

I know there are the flex tests where applied a load X newtons the wing is allowed Y mm of flex. But is there actually regulations that out on track, wings are supposed to have at least X mm of clearance with the track?

Nope just a vague rule of no moving wings.

[raymondu999]

That wouldn't be true. Because their flex test in itself means the wing would be moving and changing shape.

I only know of the rule where with a 200N load (or something like that) the wing can go down 20mm? Basically you have to have a spring constant that is regulated.

[Martin Keene]

I don't undersatnd how they can test with Newtons, instead of kgs. Surely 200N load is only the same as 20kgs?

F=ma

If F = 200 and a = 9.81ms2 for gravity, the surely they are only testing with a 20 kg load.

If so how about a wing test that uses a realistic load?

[myurr]

How about a really simple solution. Just like the FIA mandated centre section of the wing, how about an FIA mandated steel rod of a certain diameter that must run through the middle of the wing and that all parts of the wing must be securely mounted.

[raymondu999]

I'd think that was a dangerous solution. Either it would flex along with the wing, given the massive loads pushing it down, or it would be too hard and could be brittle and break, I guess?

[myurr]

I'd think that was a dangerous solution. Either it would flex along with the wing, given the massive loads pushing it down, or it would be too hard and could be brittle and break, I guess?

Okay some other material or a tube instead of a rod, or whatever would work. Either way a mandated support structure that the teams are then allowed to attach their aero parts to.

[raymondu999]

Maybe a spec central section that spans the whole wing? So they can only change the planes and cascades?

[marekk]

I think we've saw already the right solution - on new macca's.
Just write it down in the rules

[raymondu999]

Mandated porpoise nose? No thanks