Red Bull gives you ... flexing wings?

[checkered]

This flexi-saga just

seems to get new twists, turns and bends every week now. And while we're at it, try and come up with applicable synonyms for "flexi", I'm getting tired of the word already. "Pressure compliant", "variable geometry", "innovative integrity", "Ben Dover-foil" ... ? Anyway, I'm feeling lazy so here are just the basics and a few links:

DC's car had a rear facing cam in Barcelona. It shows rather clear movement especially after the main straight. Some rival teams predictably less than happy. FIA is thought to investigate further in Monaco. Horner thinks everything's a-ok, big surprise. That's that.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/58922
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCe7kc0NU-k

[kilcoo316]

Brilliant


The way I see it is, if it passes the tests, well done to the team.

[ginsu]

This just underlines the need for a serious rethink in the rule structure regarding Aerodynamics. A bunch of teams are unhappy about RBR not following the 'spirit of the rules' while technically adhering to the 'letter of the rules'. This shows how stupid the regulations currently are, this type of loophole is constantly being taken advantage of, and they should either remove it or open it up completely.

What the FIA doesn't understand is that if one team is perceived as cheating (even if they technically are not) then ALL the other teams are going to find a way to cheat in the same manner. So the reality becomes a bunch of teams trying to find loopholes to be the first to exploit it. IMHO, this is just a waste of time and money for every team, because eventually it's going to get banned, and all the expenditure was wasted on a part that was only used for a couple races.

What is so hilarious, is that the FIA has created this situation, especially in the wake of 'dramatic cost reductions'. How much wind tunnel time and CFD sims did RBR do to perfect their 'flexes on the track, but not in scrutineering' design? And the same thing can be said for the flexible-floors. How much did it cost to build a entirely new chassis, which we know, at least, Ferrari and Macca have done?

[Tom]

Maybe the FIA should loosen the restrictions on movable aero, wings can still be made safe even if they flex quite alot visably. Obviously there would still have to be rules governing how much a wing can flex, but maybe it could be lower than it currently is so that wings can flex visably and still be in the spirit of the regulations.

[bosanac1]

[IMG:200:149]http://www.supload.us/thumbs/default/RBRCheatwing.gif[/img]

[mistareno]

I'm no expert in material strength, but I'm under the impression from several years of studying aeronautics I know that it is impossible to design a wing assembly that doesn't flex to some extent.

There is probably 500+ kg of downforce on that rear wing at the end of the straight.

Something has got to flex when the whole thing is made out of relatively thin carbon fibre and the whole kit is mounted to the chassis by a thinnish mount.

IMO that gif animation is very misleading as the weight transfer of the car under brakes changes the position of the rear wheels in relation to the body (body rises up) and it makes it look a lot worse than it is.

I'd say that's well within the rules as they stand.

[siskue2005]

they are exploiting slot gap ........the rear wing just moves down , isnt it!
The GIF file is really clear
If its passed the test, then its great for redbull....but IMO if this is banned, Mclaren's wing should be banned aswell

[rjsa]

Tests are done under 500N and 1000N loads, and I imagine this is a fraction of the maximum loads on racing. If I remember right maximum deviations are 5mm and 1deg under these loads, so if the thing is under 500kgf load (4900N) some noticeable movement is expected.

Are there similar shots from other teams? I'd like to know if someone has rock solid wings.

Some shots from Alonso's car cam clearly show that new bridge wing lowering.

Ricardo

[AeroGT3]

You guys realize some of that is body/suspension movement, right? While it does flex, it's not as bad as it looks if you check the relative movement of the entire rear assembly. The car's pitching down for breaking.

[tomazy]

Yes the car does pitch down for breaking, but the camera is par of the car and it pitches down with it, so that is canseld out. The movement of the wing is relativ to the body, and it should be be firmly fixed to it, the wing should be modifaid for all the next races.

[FW 21]

I think the main flex area is the rear lower wing.

Look down behind the wishbones.

The rear lower wing is not normally the part that flexes.

Looks like they have changed tack on the flexi wing idea by making the rear lower wing and not the upper elements flex.

If you look at the endplates and the upper elements, there is not much movement there.

[allan]

it might me who's blind, but i don't see anything wrong with the rear wing. If u focus on the wheel, u'd realize that the whole body actually goes up and down, which obviously because of weight transfer. the wing does flex a little bit, but i'd bet that all the other cars are the same...

[mini696]

A bunch of teams are unhappy about RBR not following the 'spirit of the rules' while technically adhering to the 'letter of the rules'.

Thats because it is the only possible way to get this wing banned under the current rules... It passes inspection and therefore is legal, so the teams have to claim its not within the "spirit".

[mahesh248]

it mite be due to downforce and the rear suspension is usually soft which would result in such movement.Was looking so something els when its said flexing .

[Mikey_s]

The GIF image clearly shows that the wing is pivoting around the leading edge of the main element. It can be easily seen if you look at the lower element relative to the fixed plane running between the wheel shrouds.

It's a(nother) great example of using the grey areas in the rule book; Obviously the wing passes scrutineering, otherwise it would have been found to be illegal, but it is clearly flexing in a controlled and desireable manner. As has been discussed numerous times before the material properties define the degree of strain (bending) under stress (load). My 2 cents is that RBR have managed to exploit the rulebook in a positive fashion. Now it's down to the others to design a similar system... by which time the FIA will move to change to test so that all the development effort is once again wasted...

Dear old Max... if you really want to save money you will allow the teams to innovate without then changing the rles to ensure that the development money is not then funnelled straight into the bin! (as it was with flexy wings, bendy floors, tuneable mass dampers, etc...)