Rear wing flex and FIA regulatory test 2021

[godlameroso]

It's best to think of everything on the chassis to be rigid and thus, should have zero relative movement. The only things that should be moving relative to the chassis are the suspension members and tyres.

That only happens in an ideal world, in reality, everything moves a little bit, so we use this thing in engineering called tolerances.

[godlameroso]

What is the distance from the camera to the rear wing? Let's assume the car is roughly 5.4 meters, I don't know how long it is off the top of my head.

The rules say the camera is 800mm above the reference plane. Is the camera parallel to the ground or the reference plane?

I don't know anything about cameras, if anyone does and wants to share what they know, it would be helpful to the discussion.

This is the type of camera used
https://www.resolveoptics.com/207-000-6 ... zoom-lens/

Anyway, assuming the camera is roughly at the middle of the car, that gives us around 2.7 meters from the camera to the rear wing.

Let's say the ride height is 100mm at the rear and squats to 90mm at speed for a 10 mm drop. Meanwhile the front ride height is 36mm and squats to 32mm at speed. I'm being purposefully conservative, the ride height at the rear may be more, I doubt it's less. That's a 6mm drop, 2.7 meters away, how would that translate on this camera? Again I don't know anything about cameras so I'm asking in case someone knows. So how much would it look if the rear end moves down 6mm relative to the front on a 3x zoom camera with some amount of lens distortion? I don't know, hopefully the stricter tests shed more light on the truth. I eagerly await it for obvious reasons.

I want to be sure, instead of just pointing fingers, let's be more thorough with our investigation like a good scientist is supposed to do. Instead of simply saying "the wing bends illegally let's burn them at the stake", let's instead say "it sure looks like the wing is bending in a weird way, let's get more information to be sure, and try to eliminate bias". Apparently people get offended at such a suggestion, oh well.

You're drastically overthinking this.

everything on the car except the tires, and the suspension components are all "rigidly" connected. It doesn't matter if the front end squats, the rear end squats, or the car's airborne and perpendicular to the ground.

Everything on the car will remain in the same position within the cameras field of view. It's all moving together. If you see movement, it's because something is moving or flexing relative to the other components.

Correct.

In addition to that, Helmut Marko has already stipulated that the RB wing flexes, and that they are already addressing it. I posted the interview in the RW thread.

Yes I read that interview, you also glossed over the fact he also said, he doesn't know how by how much it's not in line with the new tests if at all.

"How much performance will the change cost you approximately?

Dr Helmut Marko: We are calculating that right now. But it's not the case that it would somehow be decisive for the World Championship.

The interpretation counts from 15 June with a tolerance of 20 percent. From 15 July it will be complete. Can you imagine that two variants will be developed? First, that the tolerance is used for a few races and then completely?

Dr. Helmut Marko: We have to check to what extent we are not already within this tolerance. That has just come out now.

You sound reassured about this issue..."

[zibby43]

You're drastically overthinking this.

everything on the car except the tires, and the suspension components are all "rigidly" connected. It doesn't matter if the front end squats, the rear end squats, or the car's airborne and perpendicular to the ground.

Everything on the car will remain in the same position within the cameras field of view. It's all moving together. If you see movement, it's because something is moving or flexing relative to the other components.

Correct.

In addition to that, Helmut Marko has already stipulated that the RB wing flexes, and that they are already addressing it. I posted the interview in the RW thread.

Yes I read that interview, you also glossed over the fact he also said, he doesn't know how by how much it's not in line with the new tests if at all.

"How much performance will the change cost you approximately?

Dr Helmut Marko: We are calculating that right now. But it's not the case that it would somehow be decisive for the World Championship.

The interpretation counts from 15 June with a tolerance of 20 percent. From 15 July it will be complete. Can you imagine that two variants will be developed? First, that the tolerance is used for a few races and then completely?

Dr. Helmut Marko: We have to check to what extent we are not already within this tolerance. That has just come out now.

You sound reassured about this issue..."

Because that's specifically referring to the first set of tolerances that are going to be employed. Which was a new development beyond the initial announcement made when the news first broke.

The stricter tolerances take effect July 15.

[e30ernest]

Just completely ignore the sharkfin, it's is a but not the relevant reference point, the lines are 'fixed' to the camera, the camera is fixed to the chassis, so the only movement can be that of parts that aren't rigidly attached to it, which is the wheel and suspension assembly and any part which can flex, which in this case are the wings which is very clearly visible in the footage.

https://i.imgur.com/nQ7HWRg.png

I doubt good ol' Giorgio would mind me using his old sketch.

Top pic - car at low speed, not squatted.

2nd pic - car squatted at high speed, rigidly attached non-flexing wing, the red line 'moves with the squat' if you will - the blue line was the old one before squatting.

3rd pic - wing tilting via support pillar around point 1

4th pic - wing tilting via attachment point to support pillar around point 2

From the footage i'd say that McL, Merc and Alpine are more point1, RBR is a mix of 1&2.

Another little thing
https://i.imgur.com/y3Lrjaa.gif

p.s.: i wish i was as confident in being blatantly, provably and objectively wrong ... lol

Thank you for sharing this. It illustrates the point really well. I am surprised that some people think what we are seeing is a result of squat, and still maintain that it is caused by squat even after you've illustrated what is going on really well.

[e30ernest]

To what extent is he outside the tolerance, you make the accusation it's outside, I want to know by how much. 4 pixels, 6 pixels?



Seriously mate, that's all you really have to compare, a few pixels, that's your metric for legality. So which is it?

You're assuming the metric of legality is based off the Merc wing. It will be determined by the tests and the tolerances allowed for the tests.

[dans79]

Great, not disputing that at all, I'm disputing if the wing is bending illegally, I want to make sure it is.

No one can tell you this definitely, as you would need to test the actual wing to know for sure. What everyone, including the media is going on, is the fact that the FIA is changing the tests, they aren't doing this for no reason.

[djones]

I was very surprised to read this interview with HM. Usually, when teams are doing something a little untoward they will downplay it as far as saying it won't affect them at all.

Redbull seems to have a blame culture and that was seen the most when week in, week out they would blame the straight-line speed for their performances. Never would they say the chassis or aero needed to be improved.

This interview is probably that short-sighted attitude coming through. Mercedes have clever engineers (as do all teams) and for Hamilton to specifically quote 0.3 seconds per lap, I suspect that is probably not too far off on a track like Spain. Some tracks will be less, so maybe more. HM is setting things up so they can BLAME the 'rule change' (which is not a rule change) when from July they drop back.

The Redbull wing was flexing last year and it was never mentioned until now by Mercedes. Credit where it's due, their strategy not only on but off track is generally the best. Combine that with the best engine, best driver, aspects of the aero/chassis being class-leading and Redbull really need to be having a ground-up change of approach if they are serious about being anything other than 2nd every championship. Their ingrained inability to accept blame does worry me in this respect.

[El Scorchio]

Just completely ignore the sharkfin, it's is a but not the relevant reference point, the lines are 'fixed' to the camera, the camera is fixed to the chassis, so the only movement can be that of parts that aren't rigidly attached to it, which is the wheel and suspension assembly and any part which can flex, which in this case are the wings which is very clearly visible in the footage.

https://i.imgur.com/nQ7HWRg.png

I doubt good ol' Giorgio would mind me using his old sketch.

Top pic - car at low speed, not squatted.

2nd pic - car squatted at high speed, rigidly attached non-flexing wing, the red line 'moves with the squat' if you will - the blue line was the old one before squatting.

3rd pic - wing tilting via support pillar around point 1

4th pic - wing tilting via attachment point to support pillar around point 2

From the footage i'd say that McL, Merc and Alpine are more point1, RBR is a mix of 1&2.

Another little thing
https://i.imgur.com/y3Lrjaa.gif

p.s.: i wish i was as confident in being blatantly, provably and objectively wrong ... lol

Thank you for sharing this. It illustrates the point really well. I am surprised that some people think what we are seeing is a result of squat, and still maintain that it is caused by squat even after you've illustrated what is going on really well.

I think people just see (or don't see) what they want to see. I can't at all see it as squat or anything else other than the wing flexing/moving as well.

[lucafo]

Flexible parts should not be restrict. It would bring a new technological development that also could be applied on road cars.
The crash test on the front and back already impose hardness.
Same think happened to ABS and/or electronic controls that needed to be standardized.

[_cerber1]

Revenge is a dish that is usually served cold. MB found a way to get revenge on Red Bull for banning the party mode.

[djones]

Yeah, the significant detail he is missing out on is the only team they are actually in a battle with is NOT affected.

I do agree with him that the Alpine seems to bend the most though.

[SiLo]

It's best to think of everything on the chassis to be rigid and thus, should have zero relative movement. The only things that should be moving relative to the chassis are the suspension members and tyres.

That only happens in an ideal world, in reality, everything moves a little bit, so we use this thing in engineering called tolerances.

Yes but in this instances it's flexing far beyond the allowed tolerances. It's quite obvious it is by design. I don't think people are complaining about some of the other teams that have a small amount of flex, but a few (Red Bull, Alpine) have excessive amounts.

[PlatinumZealot]

I’m noticing on all of these videos of when the wing seems to be flexing, the rear suspension arms are also angling down, meaning that the entire rear end of the car is getting pushed down lower? You can see how the suspension arms peeks over the end of the body cowling as the car gains speed and the rear end of the car lowers. Could it be the camera angle changing as the rear lowers?

The camera is rigidly mounted.
Or else RedBull would also get in trouble!

Rememeber when they had flexibile camera mounts on the noze? Yes. The ones used for aero gain. Those were banned years ago.

[PhillipM]

Flexible parts should not be restrict. It would bring a new technological development that also could be applied on road cars.
The crash test on the front and back already impose hardness.
Same think happened to ABS and/or electronic controls that needed to be standardized.

The reason for it is sudden loss of downforce in changing weather conditions or passing other vehicles can have huge consequences and you end up with a car taking off at 300kph into the catch fencing.

[godlameroso]

I’m noticing on all of these videos of when the wing seems to be flexing, the rear suspension arms are also angling down, meaning that the entire rear end of the car is getting pushed down lower? You can see how the suspension arms peeks over the end of the body cowling as the car gains speed and the rear end of the car lowers. Could it be the camera angle changing as the rear lowers?

The camera is rigidly mounted.
Or else RedBull would also get in trouble!

Rememeber when they had flexibile camera mounts on the noze? Yes. The ones used for aero gain. Those were banned years ago.

Flexible nose yes, flexible camera mounts?

Camera is allowed 1 degree of freedom. It's impossible to mount something with zero compliance.