Observing ever increasing flexibility in rear wings of some Formula One cars, the FIA has decided to try to reduce this flexibility by introducing new deflection tests.
I'll also repost the little gif which shows that no matter the level of squatting the camera will show the wing in the exact same position but within it's view the wheels will move up/down https://i.imgur.com/y3Lrjaa.gif
This is the one, the other pictures are a bit confusing and it sounded like you were agreeing that squat would cause the effect seen in the videos. Thanks for clearing that up, I was a bit worried for a second!
As it still breaks the rule on bodywork flexibility. Are some people confusing the test as making it legal? Passing the test and being legal are 2 completely different things.
That would make the Mercedes front wing illegal too, which is a silly notion. The front wing upper elements flex by a huge amount as air speed increases, losing angle of attack and shedding precious drag (in angle of attack terms, possibly even more than the rear wing upper flap). The front wing flaps pop up by about 20-30mm as Bottas slows for the corner!
If the test changes, the teams will change the design. There is (very deliberately) no spirit of the rules clause in the Formula One regulations (unlike, say, the V8 Supercar regulations where it is one of the first clauses that appear in the technical regulations!).
Both front wing and rear wing flexing is all fair play and within the regulations as far as I am concerned. Teams have clearly gone out of their way to not make the front and rear wings any more rigid than necessary. If they wanted to, they could make both of these very, very stiff but clearly they don't want to.
It's quite evident there's whole a lot more going on with the RB rw than the merc.
...and the Merc front wing, fair play?
It's all within the rules, as far as I am concerned. Why not push the flexibility of the front and rear wings to shed drag on the straights and gain downforce in the corners? You can run more wing angle without the drag penalty on the straights, it's a no-brainer.
Teams also push their luck with the flexibility of the teatray, so it bends upward with speed, so the lowest part of the car bends up and the whole car runs lower. FIA thus made a load test on that area.
It all comes down to what the FIA delegates/stewards consider acceptable.
here is what happened to rebull at the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix in 2014, when it was deemed their front wing flexed to much (even though it passed all the test if memory serves).
When checking the front wing of car numbers 01 and 03 it was found that the front wing flaps were
designed to flex under aerodynamic load. In my opinion this is not in compliance with Article 3.15 of
the Formula One Technical Regulations. Therefore I am referring this matter to the stewards for their
consideration.
No / Driver 1 - Sebastian Vettel Competitor Infiniti Red Bull Racing Time 14:00 Session Qualifying Fact Parts have been changed during Parc Parc Fermé. Offence Breach of Article 34.6 of the FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations Decision Car 1 is required to start the Race from the Pit Lane. Reason Although the team carried out work with the approval of the Technical Delegate (as per
document 39), parts have been replaced on car 1 that are different to those originally
used.
Imo, as i mentioned earlier teams are getting of easy this time around, because the season is young, the champinchips look close, and the FIA most likely doesn't want to do anything that will negatively affect the show or the outcome of the championship.
I mean imagine if Mercedes or someone else protested Red Bulls rear wing after the race and got them excluded from the race results!
As it still breaks the rule on bodywork flexibility. Are some people confusing the test as making it legal? Passing the test and being legal are 2 completely different things.
That would make the Mercedes front wing illegal too, which is a silly notion. The front wing upper elements flex by a huge amount as air speed increases, losing angle of attack and shedding precious drag (in angle of attack terms, possibly even more than the rear wing upper flap). The front wing flaps pop up by about 20-30mm as Bottas slows for the corner!
If the test changes, the teams will change the design. There is (very deliberately) no spirit of the rules clause in the Formula One regulations (unlike, say, the V8 Supercar regulations where it is one of the first clauses that appear in the technical regulations!).
Both front wing and rear wing flexing is all fair play and within the regulations as far as I am concerned. Teams have clearly gone out of their way to not make the front and rear wings any more rigid than necessary. If they wanted to, they could make both of these very, very stiff but clearly they don't want to.
It's quite evident there's whole a lot more going on with the RB rw than the merc.
...and the Merc front wing, fair play?
It's all within the rules, as far as I am concerned. Why not push the flexibility of the front and rear wings to shed drag on the straights and gain downforce in the corners? You can run more wing angle without the drag penalty on the straights, it's a no-brainer.
Teams also push their luck with the flexibility of the teatray, so it bends upward with speed, so the lowest part of the car bends up and the whole car runs lower. FIA thus made a load test on that area.
Am I right in thinking the RedBull wing is illegal even though it passes the test. As it still breaks the rule on bodywork flexibility. Are some people confusing the test as making it legal? Passing the test and being legal are 2 completely different things.
Yes and no. The rule is that things shouldn't flex. But how do you check that? You define a test and if the test is passed then you are deemed to be complying. If the test itself is incorrect or incorrectly carried out, and you pass, then you "get away with it". The FIA can change the test, of course, and that might catch you breaking the rule. Either way, you're breaking the rule (you're illegal) but you just haven't been caught.
You are breaking the law if you drive at 80mph in a 60mph zone. That there isn't a copper there to catch you doesn't change the fact that you are breaking the law. You're just "getting away with it". If the copper is there but messes up the speed reading, you're still breaking the law, he just can't prove it. So you "get away with it".
The problem for the FIA is that they outlaw flexible bodywork but then also have to accept that nothing is infinitely stiff, especially when dealing with racing car bodywork. So they have to allow some leeway. And the teams play in that grey zone.
I’ve been studying these videos now for a couple of days and comparing. The RedBull wing appears to move very progressively lower (so bleeds off drag as speed and load increases), the Mercedes also does this (and Alpine, McLaren, etc), just to a lesser degree. The Mercedes has VERY flexible shark fin and T-wing (some others also have these flexing, just to a lesser degree). This is all being done for some aerodynamic gain (more than one way to skin a cat!!).
The really alarming video is the Ferrari one, their rear wing drops as if triggered by some mechanical/hydraulic/electric device AS SOON AS the car is in a straight line (no progressive drop), is this their much talked about “low drag concept”...???
If the FIA are being reactive to to shouting of “unfair” by Mercedes (tbf it would be near impossible for LH to see the rear wing flex from his perspective whilst driving), and as a result Mercedes keep their own flexing bodywork (if it was harmful, it would be engineered out) it would be a travesty.
There were many arguments as to why DAS was illegal according to the regulations last year, but the rules were not changed until end of season (even though Mercedes allegedly ran with it disengaged at times towards the end of the season); why is this different?
Perspective - Understanding that sometimes the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.
As it still breaks the rule on bodywork flexibility. Are some people confusing the test as making it legal? Passing the test and being legal are 2 completely different things.
That would make the Mercedes front wing illegal too, which is a silly notion. The front wing upper elements flex by a huge amount as air speed increases, losing angle of attack and shedding precious drag (in angle of attack terms, possibly even more than the rear wing upper flap). The front wing flaps pop up by about 20-30mm as Bottas slows for the corner!
If the test changes, the teams will change the design. There is (very deliberately) no spirit of the rules clause in the Formula One regulations (unlike, say, the V8 Supercar regulations where it is one of the first clauses that appear in the technical regulations!).
Both front wing and rear wing flexing is all fair play and within the regulations as far as I am concerned. Teams have clearly gone out of their way to not make the front and rear wings any more rigid than necessary. If they wanted to, they could make both of these very, very stiff but clearly they don't want to.
It's quite evident there's whole a lot more going on with the RB rw than the merc.
...and the Merc front wing, fair play?
It's all within the rules, as far as I am concerned. Why not push the flexibility of the front and rear wings to shed drag on the straights and gain downforce in the corners? You can run more wing angle without the drag penalty on the straights, it's a no-brainer.
Teams also push their luck with the flexibility of the teatray, so it bends upward with speed, so the lowest part of the car bends up and the whole car runs lower. FIA thus made a load test on that area.
Did Lewis say how many tenths bendy FW gave them?
“I couldn’t see how much it was flexing due to the amount of vibration while driving” “My tyres are shot”
Perspective - Understanding that sometimes the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.
That would make the Mercedes front wing illegal too, which is a silly notion. The front wing upper elements flex by a huge amount as air speed increases, losing angle of attack and shedding precious drag (in angle of attack terms, possibly even more than the rear wing upper flap). The front wing flaps pop up by about 20-30mm as Bottas slows for the corner!
But the difference is that all of the teams have front wings that do that. Red Bull can't point to the Merc (or anyone else) and say "they're illegal" because their own wing is the same. But Mercedes can do it with the Red Bull rear wing because the Merc one doesn't do what the Red Bull one does.
And that's F1 politics and rule gaming summarised in a paragraph.
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.
I’ve been studying these videos now for a couple of days and comparing. The RedBull wing appears to move very progressively lower (so bleeds off drag as speed and load increases), the Mercedes also does this (and Alpine, McLaren, etc), just to a lesser degree. The Mercedes has VERY flexible shark fin and T-wing (some others also have these flexing, just to a lesser degree). This is all being done for some aerodynamic gain (more than one way to skin a cat!!). The really alarming video is the Ferrari one, their rear wing drops as if triggered by some mechanical/hydraulic/electric device AS SOON AS the car is in a straight line (no progressive drop), is this their much talked about “low drag concept”...???
If the FIA are being reactive to to shouting of “unfair” by Mercedes (tbf it would be near impossible for LH to see the rear wing flex from his perspective whilst driving), and as a result Mercedes keep their own flexing bodywork (if it was harmful, it would be engineered out) it would be a travesty.
There were many arguments as to why DAS was illegal according to the regulations last year, but the rules were not changed until end of season (even though Mercedes allegedly ran with it disengaged at times towards the end of the season); why is this different?
I hope you're joking. Maybe you should check some more days if that's what you come up with after studying them for days.
The Ferrari wing does not suddently drop as soon as they are on a straight line. It simply starts dropping in that fast corner. The exact same thing happens to the RedBull.
Really creative idea from you of Ferrari having a device actively triggering the rear wing flex, though.
Earlier in this thread there was imagery showing the Red Bull “swelling” at speed. Is this a way of reducing flow to the rear wing?
I wonder if that swelling might have been the cause of Perez' bodywork failure in testing as well? IIRC it was that portion of the bodywork which was ripped away?
On further reflection perhaps the swelling may reduce drag by increasing the volume of inner ducts, perhaps bypassing a radiator. And if the Perez failure could be attributed to it then that might be grounds for banning it, moveable aero with a failure mode that leaves shards of CF on the track.
Fortune favours the prepared; she has no favourites and takes no sides.
Truth is confirmed by inspection and delay; falsehood by haste and uncertainty : Tacitus
Jeez, the "swelling" of bodywork is simply that there is low pressure on the outer surface, higher pressure inside, it's a big surface so that pressure translates into quite a big force, and the bodywork is really thin layup to keep it light. That's why bodywork blows off on a semi-regular basis.
#aerogandalf "There is one big friend. It is downforce. And once you have this it’s a big mate and it’s helping a lot." Robert Kubica
And there probably isn't much in that area (basically the rear edge of where the Red Bull is on the engine cover) where they could add any bolt to hold it down, it's near or behind the center intercooler - as long as the connections between the panels hold it's fine
Jeez, the "swelling" of bodywork is simply that there is low pressure on the outer surface, higher pressure inside, it's a big surface so that pressure translates into quite a big force, and the bodywork is really thin layup to keep it light. That's why bodywork blows off on a semi-regular basis.
The question is not why it happens but if there is an advantage to be gained.
This years RB swells more than last years, and more than McLaren and Alpine and Williams which have, to my eyes, similar surfaces in that area. All wings deflect, but some deflect more. I’m simply suggesting that all engine covers swell but some swell more. Is that incidental or is there an advantage to be gained?
I’m not an aerodynamicist so I’m making the simple assumption that easing the flow through the engine cover will reduce the pressure drop at the exit and benefit the diffuser and rear wing. Am I wrong?
Fortune favours the prepared; she has no favourites and takes no sides.
Truth is confirmed by inspection and delay; falsehood by haste and uncertainty : Tacitus
Bodywork swell, In the FIA technical regulations 3.9 this is described ,with maximum limits. So if bodywork swells more , it is in fact illegal. I don’t think a team will take that risk.
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced
