williams front wing and american intelligence

[pyry]

i had a small debate over the internet with a californian based 35 year old citizen, who claimed that williams is a lousy team. the argument was based solely on the fact that the presumably american commentator had stated that the williams front wing flexes down too much presenting a safety hazard as it messes up the air flow. im under the impression that williams is surely capable of manufacturing a front wing that wouldnt flex in such a way, and anyways isnt a lower frontwing better downforce wise? i told him that they are flex tested and thinking about this i wondered how much do the teams play with the flexing front wing in the limitations, or do thay purposely make it just stiff enough to clear the tests, and are the cars then designed taking into account the downwords flexing of the front wing in the wind tunnel, after all it is much better to have optimal aero at 300 then at 100. so basically two things, the stupid american and the question above

[Monstrobolaxa]

Well the flexing problem has been a "top story" in almost all F1 forums....most people think it's strange....but the thing is that it is designed to do so. In another site they mention that it does flex bringing the wing lower but this flexing motion does not influence the wing and flow caracteristics that much because it's the main element that is flexing not the flap!....(this part is re-edited).....heheh....well forgot to mention that with the flexture of the main plane the configuration of the flap/main plane doesn't change too much in a way that would influence the downforce/air flow around it......Williams studied it for sure!!!! They're not that dumb!

So yes the "american" in that case is being quite dumb....you could have asked if airplane wings are a dangerous because they flex quite alot.....look at A340,A330 and B747....these are quite noticeable!

[Guest]

the flexing is one thing ,but the really hefty vibrations are another.
You could clearly see the complete frontwing assembly being excited at certain speeds and under braking,with the wing assy moving sideways at a rate of around 70 hz with an amplitude of half an inch.
I bet this is a thing the driver is able to sense and I bet this vibration is not inspireing confidence when you´re on the limit....

[Monstrobolaxa]

I bet this vibration is not inspireing confidence when you´re on the limit....

Probably you're right!!!! Just remembered another situation where flexing and vibration is importante.....bridges....it's not the same done for the same reason....but in any case that Californian has the Golden Gate Bridge where he can feel a slight ocilation...due to the bridges natural frequency.

[StiK]

...In another site they mention that it does flex bringing the wing lower but this flexing motion does not influence the wing and flow caracteristics that much because it's the main element that is flexing not the flap...

Well, although I haven´t seen how much the wing does flex you cannot say that it doesn´t influence that much! It´s wing in ground effect so the wing is very sensitive to the ground clearance.

[Monstrobolaxa]

I didn't explain myself that well! When I was mentioning that it didn't influence the airflow that much I wasn't considering the extra downforce that the ground efect would create. I was only considering the downforce and airflow that existed without the ground efect. But you are right anyway....the ground efect will influence the overall performance of the wing.

Now looking at the regulation it states:

3.15 Aerodynamic influence :
Any specific part of the car influencing its aerodynamic performance (with the exception of the cover
described in Article 6.5.2 in the pit lane only) :
- Must comply with the rules relating to bodywork.
- Must be rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car (rigidly secured means not having any
degree of freedom).
- Must remain immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car.
Any device or construction that is designed to bridge the gap between the sprung part of the car and the
ground is prohibited under all circumstances.

Under these regulations a flexing wing would be illegal....though....some say that if the angle of the wing doesn't vary it can be considered legal! I'm still investigating cause I have found some contradictions in this area!

[Monstrobolaxa]

Here the regs on flexing:

3.17 Bodywork flexibility :
3.17.1 Bodywork may deflect no more than 5mm vertically when a 500N load is applied vertically to it 700mm
forward of the front wheel centre line and 625mm from the car centre line. The load will be applied in a
downward direction using a 50mm diameter ram and an adapter 300mm long and 150mm wide. Teams
must supply the latter when such a test is deemed necessary.

This is only for the front wing the rear wing has its own regs....but in any case the angle may only change 1º and this is only aplicable for the rear wing when under load.

3.17.3 Bodywork may deflect by no more than one degree horizontally when a load of 1000N is applied
simultaneously to its extremities in a rearward direction 780mm above the reference plane and 130mm
behind the rear wheel centre line.

[scarbs]

First of all, F1 cars bodywork is not as rigid as you might imagine. to preserve the car from vibrations and to allow aero loadign to be passed through to the chassis it is reqiured to have a certain level of stiffness. But weight saving is just as important and bits do flex, seeign the cars over kerbs, or if you have ever seen a car on a seven post rig, everying moves about quite alarmingly. So viewers may see winglets wobble, front wings shake side-to-side and flip ups rattle, this is normal and not a sign of design deficiency.

But I have witnessed form the onboard footage and potenitally performance enhancing flex on the williams front wing, that I have not seen elsewhere.

I think there are two different cases of wing flex beign discussed here. From my view of the on car footage the front wing does flex but is longitudenal flex and not horizontal flex. From the sketch of the onboard picture, I see the flap (the tilted part with "Fed Ex" on ) flex reducing its angle of attack to the oncoming flow (shown as A on the diagram).
The flap flex that I beleive occurs is designed in and as it is not overed specifically by the rules cuodl be used for circumventing the rules. As the flap is the part subject to high loadings it can bend backwards reducing its pitch and preventing greater amounts of downforce\drag being created at higher speeds.

I have heard discussions about the main plane (the flat part with "HP" on) shown as B on the diagram, I have not seen this part flex, this was a strategy used a few years ago to make the endplate closer to the ground to improve sealing and move the main plane closer to the gorund for increased ground effect. this latter type of flex was prevented by the Scrutineers placign a heavy load on the endplate and measuring its deflection. No doubt there is still a dregree of flex in this part, which is designed in. However the reason for designing this flex is not to cheat, but to make the part only as heavy as it needs in order to be stiff enough to meet the loads and scrutineers requirements. The small resulting small amount of deflection is not a performance aid.

[Monstrobolaxa]

Humm.....I was talking about the "B-kind" flexing....I have not seen the onboard footage...so I was assuming it was the "B-kind".....now my question would be wouldn't a "A-kind" flexing be considered a novable aerodynamic device? Since the FIA hasn't said anything about it....probably they don't consider it one!

About the "A-kind" flexing.....probably this kind of flexing can only be used at determined race tracks....and if they use it always probably they'll have diferente manufacturing processes for each wing....cause it wouldn't be a good idea to have this kind of flex at the Parabolica or at Eau Rouge.....

[Guest]

Waoh! Ive just seen a onboard lap from Australia of Monty and i have never noticed the amount of flexing on the main plane, there seems to be a verticle and horizontal movement

alhough i could be fooled by the bumbs of Albert park

[DaveKillens]

x

[Monstrobolaxa]

The flexing towards the track is the B flexing on scrabs drawing.....the A flexing is the kind of flexing I believe you're talking about...this is what was happening to Williams at S. Paulo.

If I completly missed the point of your post....it probably isn't your fault...it's 3,24 in the morning and I woke up 21 and half hours ago....

[red300zx99x]

pyry,
I know some stupid american blacks who would just love to run your ass over then shoot you

[Guest]

Talking about front wings has anyone seen the pictures of the F2004 on f1-live.com. it looks like they have adapted the old wing to have a funny box under it??????

any one have any ideas if it will work?

[Guest]

Here is a picture(i hope this works!)



I realy dont know how much downforce this element would produce