FIA wants to avoid flexible bridge wings

[WhiteBlue]

http://www.f1technical.net/news/9328

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euApiLdX ... re=related[/youtube]

looks similar to the old ferrari flexi wing they complained about.



Renault seems to have anticipated such a requirement.

[bazanaius]

It depends which ferrari flexi-wing you mean..

The original nose flexi wing wasn't flexing in quite the same way. It was actually just pinned at the nose, allowing it to rotate at high speed. The McLaren bridge wing is clamped at both ends, but simply deflects under load - like the Ferrari rear wing did a while back.

B

[bar555]

Check this link also http://www.f1passionates.com/index.php/topic,253.0.html

nice video WhiteBlue =D> , and drawings also , post more if you have [-o<

[WhiteBlue]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AklGfuzNLQ[/youtube]

my comment was about the amount of flex. I'd say McLaren managed to achieve at least the flex that the Ferrari system had. I am aware that the systems are completely different in terms of the mechanical model.

[Conceptual]

I personally think that the bridge wing is one of the coolest innovations that I have seen in F1 (been watching since 2004).

I am all for a renault-style brace however. Maybe now BMW would be interested in using my idea about inverting their forward wings and using them as the bridge support... LOL, maybe not since their last email said "We are too busy to talk to anyone, so even if your idea is good, we don't care."

Good to see the obvious moving aero bit get stabilized. At least it is less for other teams to complain about.

Chris

[flynfrog]

I say let every have flexy wings what do they hurt?

[warmandog]

and here we go with bannin circle.
god sake..it is formula 1

[mike]

i think they should really get a life and get the teams to make these wings from metal, so that once it flex it stays the retarted shape that the engineering nerds design them to flex. and this will also reduce the cost of manufacturing and design. plus metal only bend and it is unlikely to shatter and we wont be see bloody carbon pieces that cut up tyres.
its about time that the FIA think off something useful rather than being inconsistant about the interpreting of the rules and interms trying to control the outcome of the championship.
2005 wing vibration
2006 mass damper
2007 flexiable floor
2008 flexiable bridge wing..wtf
what next ?? the new mass damper??

[freedom_honda]

FIA: "wooooo the cars are too fast we need to slow them down ='["

[bazanaius]

From what I've heard, the mclaren wing flexing like that isn't actually doing them any good! I don't know any details but to me I'd stick a brace in there to stop it moving so it does what it's supposed to..
B

[WhiteBlue]

I say let every have flexy wings what do they hurt?

actually very little. historically wings were supposed to be fixed for two reasons. early active wing cars 1967-1969 were unreliable and malfunctioned and bendy wing were more likely to fail.



there were some bad accidents including Rind's in Barcelona 1969.



the wings had to be fixed to the chassis instead of the suspension.



note the totally different wing mountings of this Lotus 1970

then came the era of ground effect and they did not bother so much with wings until in the 90ties aerodynamic was the one decisive issue. wings were designed to bend in order to reduce drag at high speed. and back were the wing failures. so the old rules were reinforced and extended.

One reason for not allowing performance increasing flexible or movable wings was the problem of curbing performance. F1 allways had to cut back on performance to keep speeds safe because it was so innovative.

I guess that with the new fuel saving philosophy flexible or movable wings will be allowed sooner or later. it will probably be inserted in a rule package when power cut happens anyway. as it looks 2013 could be the year.

[Conceptual]

I think that the banning of the mass damper set the benchmark for how rediculously remote that the "no moving aero" rule can be interpereted. The TMD was banned by association, I don't think that it is too far fetched to ban an obviously moving wing. Performance speculation should have zero bearing on the enforcement since there is the precedence set for enforcing the same rule with the internally mounted TMD.

What is it going to hurt? So every team has to put a strut in place. I can guarantee that there is SOME benefit to it moving, or else it would already be solid.

Chris

[johny]

here we have some implementations

[WhiteBlue]

hehe, you cannot have anything obstruct the holy star

[flynfrog]

I say let every have flexy wings what do they hurt?

actually very little. historically wings were supposed to be fixed for two reasons. early active wing cars 1967-1969 were unreliable and malfunctioned and bendy wing were more likely to fail.



there were some bad accidents including Rind's in Barcelona 1969.



the wings had to be fixed to the chassis instead of the suspension.



note the totally different wing mountings of this Lotus 1970

then came the era of ground effect and they did not bother so much with wings until in the 90ties aerodynamic was the one decisive issue. wings were designed to bend in order to reduce drag at high speed. and back were the wing failures. so the old rules were reinforced and extended.

One reason for not allowing performance increasing flexible or movable wings was the problem of curbing performance. F1 allways had to cut back on performance to keep speeds safe because it was so innovative.

I guess that with the new fuel saving philosophy flexible or movable wings will be allowed sooner or later. it will probably be inserted in a rule package when power cut happens anyway. as it looks 2013 could be the year.

I understand where the rule came from but we have come along way since the wings that are pictured above. They even do static testing before the race.

when was the last wing failure that did not involve impact. I want to say kimi in 02 or 03 maybe