Flexible wings controversy 2010

[xpensive]

Or maybe it has to do with the increase of the aerodynamic moment increasing with the speed and producing a torque that is cleverly employed by the wisely set fibers in the wing to lower a part of it. In this case you most likely would pass the kind of tests the FIA is requesting to comply.

Precisely. With carbon fibre you can produce an un-isotropic material that does just that.

[Alexpcenteno]

I think this image will show you what all the fuss is about.

Has anyone notice that the tires also deform?

[raymondu999]

I think that's because of the load increase of several tons due to downforce

[conni]

i think its designed like the wishbones with flexures so the middle is stiff then it bends at the flexures that would be easy to make

conni

[marcush.]

I think this image will show you what all the fuss is about.

what is that black line on the edge of the tub? just at the brakepoint to the nosecone there sems to be a gap increasing in width??? or is it just the light that doing tricks there..
Loooking between the wishbones one can clearly see that the middle section of the wing moves as well...

so I think there are indeed two effects:the bendingof the wing itself across the span
into a u shape + tilting of the whole nose assembly by means of spring loaded nosecone fasteners? that ´d shed light on the Vettel happenings in Silverstone..instead of a nose cone controversy public attention was directed towrds a human clash...clever..

[ringo]

Yes the whole wing moves. In that case the wing pillars may have knees.
Which open from drag force from the wing, similar to opening an elbow joint.

They already have a dog leg look, wouldn't be surprised if there are flextures at the kink in the pillar.

[kyniu]

Maybe we should connect front wing movements ( up and down ) with the steering wheel. In some cases it necessary to have downforce with 200km/h ( curve ) in some you don’t ( straight ) so it not should be regulated just by aero elements by themselves but by driver. So I’ll give to discus two ideas:
1. The position of the steering wheel activate the work of drives in front wing (working asymmetrically) to regulate the plates.
2. The whole nose is moving (in any direction) also because of the steering wheel movements. (The black head with cables connected to wing during tests also might be rotating).

[xpensive]

Again, I am very much convinced that we behold an anisotropic carbonfibre material, where a horisontal load from drag is converted into a vertical deflection. Not that dificult to do if you arrange the fibre-layers properly.

This is simply not detected by the FIAs vertical load-test.

[marcush.]

Again, I am very much convinced that we behold an anisotropic carbonfibre material, where a horisontal load from drag is converted into a vertical deflection. Not that dificult to do if you arrange the fibre-layers properly.

This is simply not detected by the FIAs vertical load-test.

in my view this is one of the areas ,but still we see considerable movement in the centresection as well..

what about that little access plate in the main wing just left (in drive direction) of the upper plane support? is there a spar adjuster in there to allow for having the wing flex at the right load?

[xpensive]

Good morning marchush. Well, center-section is standardized of course, but perhaps the nose-cone is designed in an anisotropic way in order to lower the whole thing as a function of drag?

[marcush.]

would at least explain why Macs is officially stating they are puzzled by the behaviour of the RB wing ....

could the deflection be influenced also by the buildup of sideforce as you turn in?
that would explain a raise of downforce on turn in ..the design of the wing supports could for sure contribute

[xpensive]

I think the primary objective is to lower the wing to the ground at speed, which will by itself increase downforce.

Secondary objective would be to make wing-angle speed-dependent, by introducing a "twist" somewhere in the system.

[SiLo]

From the pictures shown and the video posted, the movement is quite clear. I don't understand how the FIA cannot do something about this, their tests are obviously not rigorous enough.

Personally I believe they should test them, until they break, and any amount of flex will only be tolerated within a certain limit, say 5 to 10mm. People saying the Mclaren has a higher ride height are wrong, the skidpan underneath the car on the Mclaren is almost rubbing the floor, the same with the Ferrari and the Red Bull.

Looking at the Ferrari and the Red Bull front wing, the whole thing looks a lot closed to the ground, even at the point meeting the car, which is what I cannot fathom....

[marcush.]

my thinking is along the lines of the interface of the wing to the wingstays ,wich happen to be paralell...
Excert sideforce the stay will bend in a paralellogram type motion this force could be used to unlock the spring preloaded wingfixation .showing full stiffness in a static load ,antil you feed in sideforce.
the same could of course work for longitudinal =drag force as well...

against this line of thinking speaks the difficulty to hide a mechanism.A clever layup of fibres would do the trick without it even be illegegal according to the
words of the rules only cotradicting the spirit of the rules..
Quit interesting that Newey was coming up with safety concerns with the f-duct ,but
has no issues introducing " intelligent "aero of his own thinking...

[xpensive]

I would be surprised if anyone was bold enough to manipulate the standardized center-section itself, plane and pillars.

But how the interface with the nose lowers the entire wing and how the side elements twist, all as a function of horizontal drag, that's where scrutineering can't catch you.