Rear wing flex and FIA regulatory test 2021

[SiLo]

From the footage a lot of it is happening in the endplate, then probably some near the connection wing to support, maybe some is happening in the support itself or at least where it is connected to the car.

I have highlighted some of the changes here.

They could absolutely just slap another layer of carbon onto those parts to stiffen them up, question is whether they would then still work as well or if that wouldn't bring other issues with it.

Isn't this highlighting that the entire wing is pivoting around the mounting points that are parallel to the front side of the wing? I imagine what is happening is the middle mounting strut is the point of rotation, because that only needs to move a little bit for the rear of the wing to move a lot.

[SiLo]

From the footage a lot of it is happening in the endplate, then probably some near the connection wing to support, maybe some is happening in the support itself or at least where it is connected to the car.

I have highlighted some of the changes here.

They could absolutely just slap another layer of carbon onto those parts to stiffen them up, question is whether they would then still work as well or if that wouldn't bring other issues with it.

It's probably a clever core material and lay up so it might actually need a new end plate design to make it stiff enough. Horner was saying half a million to change it but I bet it wouldn't be anything like that at all, unless there's more to it than just the end plates flexing.

The thing with these clever parts is that it adds ammunition for the FIA to further standardise parts in order to keep costs under control. "Your rear wing support structure will be laid up like this:"

I wonder if the 2022 cars will have scope for this sort of flexibility in the wings etc.

If I was to guess it would be this. For me, it's obvious it's by design, and creating a wing that flexes a lot less wouldn't cost £500K, but they have thrown that figure out to make some noise about it being bad for the sport.

Ironically ignoring the fact that they likely spent millions figuring out how to get the wing to flex but not be detected during the FIA tests.

[rogazilla]

...

If I was to guess it would be this. For me, it's obvious it's by design, and creating a wing that flexes a lot less wouldn't cost £500K, but they have thrown that figure out to make some noise about it being bad for the sport.

Ironically ignoring the fact that they likely spent millions figuring out how to get the wing to flex but not be detected during the FIA tests.

I say it is designed to pass the test and that's obvious for every team. I think of this whole situation this way. If the scoring system at school is that you get an A if you score 93+ on a test where 100 is the full score, your goal is to score at least 93 points on your test. Bob consistently getting 98 and looked at Jake who's consistently scoring 93 and both getting an A at the end. Bob decided that 93 should not be an A and demand that 98 should be an A.

Politics aside, the cost may be as high as what Horner quoted or less. The simple thing is to beef up the structure so it does not flex and I think that's what everyone is focused on. I would say, everyone will focus on the new test and make sure they pass the new test just. On the other hand, the correlation of the car when it is designed obviously take the flex into consideration. What that means is that if the rear wing no longer flex at a certain speed, then the design has to change to find a new compromise between drag and downforce. They may have to change other parts to move the air differently because the wing is not tilting back as much. There is always impact as most of the aero devices does not work all on its own.The air move from the front to the back and rear wing is at the very end, you want to make sure the air gets there correctly. That's probably where all the cost comes from.

[nevill3]

So basically Mercedes are choosing which part of moveable aero to protest based on what benefits them the most? RBR and FIA are entitled not to play that game.

Of course they are only going to protest another teams perceived erroneous parts, in which world would a team protest their own designs, it is the way it has been forever in F1 and how it should be. Cutting edge and highly intelligent engineers and designers looking to maximise their teams performance without obviously falling foul of the current rule set.

[RZS10]

More like Bob and Jake take the same road to work.
The speed limit is 100kph, both know that the police has set the speed cameras along the way to 110kph.
Jake knows where the cameras are and is doing 150kph+ everywhere and only slows down to 110kph when he has to, Bob however does 110kph consistently because he doesn't want to break the law too much .
Bob complains to the police because he doesn't like that Jake arrives at work a lot earlier every day.
The police set up more speed cameras and says they might end up using section control to make sure no one is speeding.

[SiLo]

...

If I was to guess it would be this. For me, it's obvious it's by design, and creating a wing that flexes a lot less wouldn't cost £500K, but they have thrown that figure out to make some noise about it being bad for the sport.

Ironically ignoring the fact that they likely spent millions figuring out how to get the wing to flex but not be detected during the FIA tests.

I say it is designed to pass the test and that's obvious for every team. I think of this whole situation this way. If the scoring system at school is that you get an A if you score 93+ on a test where 100 is the full score, your goal is to score at least 93 points on your test. Bob consistently getting 98 and looked at Jake who's consistently scoring 93 and both getting an A at the end. Bob decided that 93 should not be an A and demand that 98 should be an A.

Politics aside, the cost may be as high as what Horner quoted or less. The simple thing is to beef up the structure so it does not flex and I think that's what everyone is focused on. I would say, everyone will focus on the new test and make sure they pass the new test just. On the other hand, the correlation of the car when it is designed obviously take the flex into consideration. What that means is that if the rear wing no longer flex at a certain speed, then the design has to change to find a new compromise between drag and downforce. They may have to change other parts to move the air differently because the wing is not tilting back as much. There is always impact as most of the aero devices does not work all on its own.The air move from the front to the back and rear wing is at the very end, you want to make sure the air gets there correctly. That's probably where all the cost comes from.

If they have to redesign other parts of the car then that is their own fault surely?

[El Scorchio]

...

If I was to guess it would be this. For me, it's obvious it's by design, and creating a wing that flexes a lot less wouldn't cost £500K, but they have thrown that figure out to make some noise about it being bad for the sport.

Ironically ignoring the fact that they likely spent millions figuring out how to get the wing to flex but not be detected during the FIA tests.

I say it is designed to pass the test and that's obvious for every team. I think of this whole situation this way. If the scoring system at school is that you get an A if you score 93+ on a test where 100 is the full score, your goal is to score at least 93 points on your test. Bob consistently getting 98 and looked at Jake who's consistently scoring 93 and both getting an A at the end. Bob decided that 93 should not be an A and demand that 98 should be an A.

Politics aside, the cost may be as high as what Horner quoted or less. The simple thing is to beef up the structure so it does not flex and I think that's what everyone is focused on. I would say, everyone will focus on the new test and make sure they pass the new test just. On the other hand, the correlation of the car when it is designed obviously take the flex into consideration. What that means is that if the rear wing no longer flex at a certain speed, then the design has to change to find a new compromise between drag and downforce. They may have to change other parts to move the air differently because the wing is not tilting back as much. There is always impact as most of the aero devices does not work all on its own.The air move from the front to the back and rear wing is at the very end, you want to make sure the air gets there correctly. That's probably where all the cost comes from.

If they have to redesign other parts of the car then that is their own fault surely?

Exactly. They (and the other teams with similar rear wing solutions) took a calculated risk on it remaining legal as identified by the existing tests. If the new tests put in place make the wing no longer legal then the risk has not paid off. If the new tests keep the wing legal, then it has.

[Jolle]

I say it is designed to pass the test and that's obvious for every team. I think of this whole situation this way. If the scoring system at school is that you get an A if you score 93+ on a test where 100 is the full score, your goal is to score at least 93 points on your test. Bob consistently getting 98 and looked at Jake who's consistently scoring 93 and both getting an A at the end. Bob decided that 93 should not be an A and demand that 98 should be an A.

Politics aside, the cost may be as high as what Horner quoted or less. The simple thing is to beef up the structure so it does not flex and I think that's what everyone is focused on. I would say, everyone will focus on the new test and make sure they pass the new test just. On the other hand, the correlation of the car when it is designed obviously take the flex into consideration. What that means is that if the rear wing no longer flex at a certain speed, then the design has to change to find a new compromise between drag and downforce. They may have to change other parts to move the air differently because the wing is not tilting back as much. There is always impact as most of the aero devices does not work all on its own.The air move from the front to the back and rear wing is at the very end, you want to make sure the air gets there correctly. That's probably where all the cost comes from.

If they have to redesign other parts of the car then that is their own fault surely?

Exactly. They (and the other teams with similar rear wing solutions) took a calculated risk on it remaining legal as identified by the existing tests. If the new tests put in place make the wing no longer legal then the risk has not paid off. If the new tests keep the wing legal, then it has.

It sound a bit like both Mercedes and RedBull are using anything possible to be victims of the cost cap.

[SiLo]

If they have to redesign other parts of the car then that is their own fault surely?

Exactly. They (and the other teams with similar rear wing solutions) took a calculated risk on it remaining legal as identified by the existing tests. If the new tests put in place make the wing no longer legal then the risk has not paid off. If the new tests keep the wing legal, then it has.

It sound a bit like both Mercedes and RedBull are using anything possible to be victims of the cost cap.

Both teams are doing whatever they can to win, it's as simple as that. People can get annoyed about whatever they want but it won't change the fact that if the roles were reversed exactly the same thing would be happening.

[RZS10]

Found this in the RBR team thread:

Helmut Marko.
"We are changing our wing so that it passes the FIA's new test at the scheduled time. But we can only do that after Baku.
We have to change the whole rear end and you can't just build a new wing".
Marko understands Mercedes' frustration, but also points to the German team when it comes to flexible wings.

"It's part of F1 that teams look at each other if there is something special on the car. We did the same when Mercedes came around the corner with the DAS system last year. The FIA then declared it illegal, but they were allowed to use it until the last race. We accepted that, but isn't Mercedes doing the same with our rear wing now?"

The doctor of law, however, does not believe that Mercedes is really protesting against the result of Baku. “Mercedes would have to protest against eight cars. Because in addition to us, Ferrari, Alfa Romeo and Alpine are also affected. Do you really want to do that and cause a major scandal? I do not think so."

Original source: https://f1-insider.com/formel-1-red-bul ... -mercedes/

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/85097/ma ... lowed.html

I know that this is coming from Red Bull's PR department personified, Mr.Marko, and the comparison to DAS is complete nonsense and factually incorrect but he claims they have to "change the whole rear end", that is obviously an exaggeration but i wonder what would have to be changed if not just the wing and the support pillar ... Diffusor? Rear crash structure? There's not that many parts that have any sort of connection to the wing.

[SiLo]

Found this in the RBR team thread:

Helmut Marko.
"We are changing our wing so that it passes the FIA's new test at the scheduled time. But we can only do that after Baku.
We have to change the whole rear end and you can't just build a new wing".
Marko understands Mercedes' frustration, but also points to the German team when it comes to flexible wings.

"It's part of F1 that teams look at each other if there is something special on the car. We did the same when Mercedes came around the corner with the DAS system last year. The FIA then declared it illegal, but they were allowed to use it until the last race. We accepted that, but isn't Mercedes doing the same with our rear wing now?"

The doctor of law, however, does not believe that Mercedes is really protesting against the result of Baku. “Mercedes would have to protest against eight cars. Because in addition to us, Ferrari, Alfa Romeo and Alpine are also affected. Do you really want to do that and cause a major scandal? I do not think so."

Original source: https://f1-insider.com/formel-1-red-bul ... -mercedes/

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/85097/ma ... lowed.html

I know that this is coming from Red Bull's PR department personified, Mr.Marko, and the comparison to DAS is complete nonsense but he claims they have to "change the whole rear end", that is obviously an exaggeration but i wonder what would have to be changed if not just the wing and the support pillar ... Diffusor? Rear crash structure? There's not that many parts that have any sort of connection to the wing.

The really stupid thing for them is, if they aren't lying, this is saying that the entire concept of the wing flexing is designed into the entire rear end of the car and is being taken advantage of as much as possible.

[nzjrs]

Good point from Marko about protesting all the other teams. Protesting is kind of mutually assured destruction.

[SmallSoldier]

Found this in the RBR team thread:

Helmut Marko.
"We are changing our wing so that it passes the FIA's new test at the scheduled time. But we can only do that after Baku.
We have to change the whole rear end and you can't just build a new wing".
Marko understands Mercedes' frustration, but also points to the German team when it comes to flexible wings.

"It's part of F1 that teams look at each other if there is something special on the car. We did the same when Mercedes came around the corner with the DAS system last year. The FIA then declared it illegal, but they were allowed to use it until the last race. We accepted that, but isn't Mercedes doing the same with our rear wing now?"

The doctor of law, however, does not believe that Mercedes is really protesting against the result of Baku. “Mercedes would have to protest against eight cars. Because in addition to us, Ferrari, Alfa Romeo and Alpine are also affected. Do you really want to do that and cause a major scandal? I do not think so."

Original source: https://f1-insider.com/formel-1-red-bul ... -mercedes/

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/85097/ma ... lowed.html

I know that this is coming from Red Bull's PR department personified, Mr.Marko, and the comparison to DAS is complete nonsense and factually incorrect but he claims they have to "change the whole rear end", that is obviously an exaggeration but i wonder what would have to be changed if not just the wing and the support pillar ... Diffusor? Rear crash structure? There's not that many parts that have any sort of connection to the wing.

Not only that, if Marko is making a comparison between the situation with DAS and the Rear Wings and considering DAS illegal, is he also considering their Rear Wing illegal? He is the one placing both under the same scope (even though we know that DAS wasn’t illegal in 2020 and actually ruled legal after they protested it).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ispano6]

Good point from Marko about protesting all the other teams. Protesting is kind of mutually assured destruction.

Kind of makes you think a majority rules play may be at hand. Toto himself did allude to them adopting bending wings if other teams still pass the new tests. Then it would seem Mercedes missed out on the fad and are just sour they didn't exploit that area of the rules and find themselves having to catch up. In any case, I'm sure teams will come up with compromises or innovative alternatives that achieve similar performance, perhaps maybe even flappy oscillating sharkfins and t-wings or a suspension that squats enough to achieve the same angle rear wing edge. Will just have to wait and see. The money will be spent on the R&D, not a rudimentary materials fix.

[SmallSoldier]

Good point from Marko about protesting all the other teams. Protesting is kind of mutually assured destruction.

Kind of makes you think a majority rules play may be at hand. Toto himself did allude to them adopting bending wings if other teams still pass the new tests. Then it would seem Mercedes missed out on the fad and are just sour they didn't exploit that area of the rules and find themselves having to catch up. In any case, I'm sure teams will come up with compromises or innovative alternatives that achieve similar performance, perhaps maybe even flappy oscillating sharkfins and t-wings or a suspension that squats enough to achieve the same angle rear wing edge. Will just have to wait and see. The money will be spent on the R&D, not a rudimentary materials fix.

Good point from Marko about protesting all the other teams. Protesting is kind of mutually assured destruction.

Kind of makes you think a majority rules play may be at hand. Toto himself did allude to them adopting bending wings if other teams still pass the new tests. Then it would seem Mercedes missed out on the fad and are just sour they didn't exploit that area of the rules and find themselves having to catch up. In any case, I'm sure teams will come up with compromises or innovative alternatives that achieve similar performance, perhaps maybe even flappy oscillating sharkfins and t-wings or a suspension that squats enough to achieve the same angle rear wing edge. Will just have to wait and see. The money will be spent on the R&D, not a rudimentary materials fix.

The flexi wings have been known since at least Austria of last year in their current form, Mercedes actually brought it up with the FIA last season around July... The fact that Mercedes didn’t implement it was not by accident, they were probably counting on Red Bull among other teams to use them this season and are bringing the clarification / protest up at a very convenient time in the Championship, just when teams are thinking about moving towards their 2022 cars and therefore either taking resources from that or having to implement solutions that will take some time to refine and minimize the impact of the change on their cars.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk