Flexible wings 2011

[myurr]

I'm trying to image their reasoning for not increasing the test load. Seems simple enough.

Probably because otherwise the spot load could damage the wing. In the race that downforce will act over a large part of the surface.

[bot6]

That is exactly my point Myurr. The current test is not representative of the real load on the wing, since it concentrates on one spot load when the actual center of aero effort on the wing might be in a totally different place.

Formula none -> I agree with you that the Sauber disqualification was a bit harsh, especially considering that at least according to Key, there was no performance gain. They could have just given them a little fine for good measure. And witht he way they act towards the top teams, being sometimes quite permissive, it does seem unfair.

The thing is, though, it's a completely different subject and a completely different area of the car.

As far as the front wings go, RBR and now McLaren are clearly braking the rules. Apparently from the pictures above Merc are trying something similar. The fact that those rules are not enforced does not make it right.

If you kill someone and you don't get caught, you're still braking the law right? Not getting caught does not make it more ethical.

[Richard]

It's very simple - the wings are designed to meet the scrutineer's tests. If you pass the test, then you are deemed to comply with the rules.

If they wanted to improve the testing, they would be better to add horizontal load as well as the vertical. The test process should also allow the load to be applied anywhere along the end plate, not just at a specified point. This would identify if the wing construction was built for torsional deflection to rotate the end plates closer to the ground.

The ultimate test would take the entire nosecone & wing off to a wind tunnel after each race. However that would be a rather disproportionate, and could take a week or two.

My conclusion is to leave the rules as they are. All teams have the same rules, all teams can see what RB have been doing, all teams are free to copy if they want/can.

[shelly]

I have found intersting stuff on the subject here:

http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~garfinkm/Spar.html

There ae drawing and animation explaining non isotropic behaviour of carbon laminates; especially it addresses the theme of bend-twist coupling obtained via unbalanced lamination.

With unbalanced lamination twist would be obtained without pivoting, but just applying flexing moment.

Agree with fausto cedros previous post on the fact that aerodynamic moment would twist the front wing in the sense of decreasing incidence, but twist effet due to flex load could compensate and overshadow this.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

I see what you are saying Richard.

But there was all the hoo ha over the DDD, the point was it complied with written rule. Watching the end plates of a front wing touch the ground is a bit of a joke really, regardless of any static test it passes.
Whitmarsh said there is a huge gain to be had doing this, does anyone have concrete stats as to what the possible gains would be???

[FW17]

March 25, 2011 | by jamesallenonf1

Vettel suffered what looked like a bad blister on his left front tyre and there was something going on with the left front of the Red Bull car, because the underside of the wings seemed to be getting damaged. Although the load tests on the front wings are tougher than last year and wings are deflecting less than before, the feeling is that the Red Bull is still the one with the most wing flex.

March 26, 2011 | by jamesallenonf1
Judging from this high speed photo, the Red Bull still has a front wing which is getting very low to the ground when under aerodynamic load. It passes the much more stringent FIA tests, but clearly there are no limits to what the team can achieve with advanced carbon fibre layering techniques.

FIA even carried out an assymetric front wing deflection test was carried on car numbers 01 and 03 26 March 2011 and both cars passed.

[bot6]

JET -> My guess would be 1-1.5 seconds a lap, considering the performance difference on the McLaren between before and after the bendy wing.

[marekk]

JET -> My guess would be 1-1.5 seconds a lap, considering the performance difference on the McLaren between before and after the bendy wing.

It depends on track, but could be even more then this, IMO.

We should take into account not only downforce increase - for a wing in ground effect (wing roughly 25% of wing span over the ground ), induced drag is roughly linearly dependent on hight, down to 0 when on ground level. By the look of RB7's wing, they can achieve 2-3 times reduction in induced drag at top speed. HUGHE.

[shelly]

@marekk: I am not sure that flexi wing laptime advantage is due to drag reduction; we also have to condider that the drooping wing will shield the lower part of the front wheels, but it will not shield the upper part (that part that would have been shieled in normal position). So I think there is a drag penalty related to this, that could partly or completely compensate for a reduction in induced drag.

Agree with you that front flexi wing advantage is huge; I think like others in this thread that the big performance jump made by mclaren is more due to front wing than to exhaust.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

I read whitmarsh saying a flex of 2 to 3 cm's would count as a second a lap easily!
From what I can see, the RB wing is flexing more than that. Anyone looking to get a 1second performance advantage should be looking at getting those front wings flexing, through complex carbon fibre construction techniques or whatever else it that Red Bull or doing. Because whatever else you do, you not going to get such a big gain unless it's a huge breakthrough!

Ross, Martin, Frank and Stefano are you reading....

[marekk]

@marekk: I am not sure that flexi wing laptime advantage is due to drag reduction; we also have to condider that the drooping wing will shield the lower part of the front wheels, but it will not shield the upper part (that part that would have been shieled in normal position). So I think there is a drag penalty related to this, that could partly or completely compensate for a reduction in induced drag.

Agree with you that front flexi wing advantage is huge; I think like others in this thread that the big performance jump made by mclaren is more due to front wing than to exhaust.

From the available photos it looks more like pivoting then bending of FW, and effectively just increasing wings angle of attack. If this is the fall, external flow's bend will be (in correspondence to increased downforce) bigger, even better avoiding front wheels. So more downforce, less FW induced drag AND less front tyre drag IMO.
Only real drawback i can see to this being increased risk of loosing FW at speed and getting airborne like ehm Mark Webber.
As for rules enforcement - 4 cm wooden planks under end plates will do the job.
It doesn't look like safety is main concern of FIA in this regard, does it ?

[shelly]

From the available photos it looks more like pivoting then bending

I think that pivoting is a conseuqnce of bending, like is expalined in the link I posted previously.

What is amazing in my opinion is that after a year or so in which rbr front wing is watched closely, the other big teams seems not to have developed fornt wings that have the same effectiveness.

Flexing front wing is not a new concept (I remember schuey's f310b in suzuka 1997 for example) but be it pivoting ,flexing, nose drooping, rolling without rear suspensions, tea tray bending upwards or what else, no other car runs the front wing as close as rbr (excpet maybe ferrari in 2010 summer, before rules restriction).

Seems too strange other teams have not closed the gap

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

+1 shelly

There are far more technical things in F1 than making a wing bend. The fia regs may have made it more difficult, but the rb7 is showing all the hallmarks of the rb6. For the sake of a competitive season i hope others cotton on quickly.

[marcush.]

I think todays F1 teams are more into risk management and nurturing their own ideas than really understanding the performance differentiators and erasing those things holding you back.
It´s quite easy to look at a wing and say oh they got this shape let´s copy and we are there.Let´s have this wheelbase.Let´s have pullrod.
very cleverly RedBull has come up with loads of new stuff of late and they have managed to guide the opponents into false assumptions:
V-shaped tub-no performance differntiator but all teams have looked into it (bare Mclaren),Rideheight issue ,exhaust blowns diffussers ,flexible teatrays,and bendy wings plus bendy noses...
If you don´t mind I´m willing to bet on them having a bendy chassis as well who said we would have spotted all the things they do already....
Caught asleep I can only say.

[marekk]

From the available photos it looks more like pivoting then bending

I think that pivoting is a conseuqnce of bending, like is expalined in the link I posted previously.

What is amazing in my opinion is that after a year or so in which rbr front wing is watched closely, the other big teams seems not to have developed fornt wings that have the same effectiveness.
...
Seems too strange other teams have not closed the gap

The problem is you have to keep the balance IMO.
Even if other teams are able to have more downforce on FW, they'll nedd more on rear wheels to, which means simply (if not going for far more drag from steeper rear wing) better difuser efficency.
And this is the really tricky part. RB5's single decker was almost as good as Brawn's double and is now even better.
I doubt about Merc and Ferrari, but McLaren and Renault do have potential this year to catch RBR with a little more FW flex/pivot.