Flexiwings 2024

[Sevach]

“It’s legal it passes the test”

Means Ferrari engine, mirrors, flexible floor, grapefruit oil burning and more were all legal because they all passed the tests and sensor monitors.

Their stance is quite ridiculous.

And they did force teams to change flex wings and floors mid season with cost cap implemented, so that excuse also doesn't fly (as if Mclaren would find it difficult to reinforce their wings).

[lio007]

Conspiracy ON:
The Greek buddies Peter Prodromou and Nikolas Tombazis
Conspiracy OFF

[Vanja #66]

The whole rear wing structure leans back on the RB and despite the distance between yellow and red lines being similar, the camera on the bull is further away, or at least the aperture creates that perspective, so the AoA "lean" was greater on the Bull and affected DRS flap and the main plane. Not quite apples and oranges, but not apples and apples either.

Two things, it's Spain for RB case, so the wing is considerably bigger and generates more drag and thus more flexing load, two - the comparison of RB wing is a bit enlarged as the red line starts above the wing and not on the trailing edge like I did

[franbatista123]

It begins.

[mwillems]

The whole rear wing structure leans back on the RB and despite the distance between yellow and red lines being similar, the camera on the bull is further away, or at least the aperture creates that perspective, so the AoA "lean" was greater on the Bull and affected DRS flap and the main plane. Not quite apples and oranges, but not apples and apples either.

Two things, it's Spain for RB case, so the wing is considerably bigger and generates more drag and thus more flexing load, two - the comparison of RB wing is a bit enlarged as the red line starts above the wing and not on the trailing edge like I did

The AoA change is designed in to the wings, so yes the forces are different but the flex was designed with that in mind, they know exactly what forces are coming. So I'm not sure we can blame this on the Barcelona track characteristics and pretend the designers had no idea air would force it back so much

The RB still looks to be flexing more, in 2 ways. One, in the actual height between the top of the flap at both ends of a straight, the RB looks to lean back a lot more. Two, in the fact that there is substantially more bodywork moving including the main plane. It wouldn't surprise me if the issue with the RB wing was the fact that the whole thing was leaning. it's not apples for apples and I don't think it proves inconsistency.


That said, I do have my own opinion that the FIA and Liberty do not want to meddle with this and next season since we are having some of the best racing of the past 30 years. It may not be the reason, but I'm sure it is in the back of their minds. I was surprised about the front wing. This seems a little less clear cut, but then who knows, perhaps the vortices from those leading edges do something special.

Do we have any pics of the Mclaren with DRS open, I'm really interested to see if there is no deformation then.

[codetower]

“It’s legal it passes the test”

Means Ferrari engine, mirrors, flexible floor, grapefruit oil burning and more were all legal because they all passed the tests and sensor monitors.

I was about to say the same. The Ferrari engine passed the "flow" tests. They forced them to change it but didn't impose a penalty because they just couldn't figure out HOW they were able to pass the tests. But if I recall correctly, they "passed the test".

So, any bets on who the first team to copy the mini-drs will be?

[Farnborough]

“It’s legal it passes the test”

Means Ferrari engine, mirrors, flexible floor, grapefruit oil burning and more were all legal because they all passed the tests and sensor monitors.

I was about to say the same. The Ferrari engine passed the "flow" tests. They forced them to change it but didn't impose a penalty because they just couldn't figure out HOW they were able to pass the tests. But if I recall correctly, they "passed the test".

So, any bets on who the first team to copy the mini-drs will be?

I understand that one, the information was in public domain how they achieved that effect too. Also very different to this flex within the wing's structure, which is of course not hidden but also doesn't appear to be specifically measured against a published criteria by FIA .
doesn't look to me that there's a rule to prohibit this wing as there definitely was then and "IS" now specific rules on flow of fuel, just not tight enough in that case, but subsequently changed and informed to all.

One cannot be compared to the other in these two example.

[ispano6]

It can still be looked at because it may be breaching the spirit of the rules.

“...designs whose structural characteristics are altered by secondary parameters, so as to produce (whilst running at the track) a different deflection characteristic than when stationary during the FIA checks. Examples of secondary parameters could be temperature, aerodynamic load etc.”

In my experience, heating up certain glues and materials makes them malleable and softer to deform and shape.

In morphing wing technology, the shapes are altered by heating up a network of wires inside the flexing members along the structure.

Much like a heat blanket, you can change the characteristics of the wing by allowing it to not cool down at speed. I've seen damaged F1 wings have tethers and fibers but these could all be wires or threading that conduct electricity.

For F1 cars, plenty of heat is generated from the exhaust and brakes. It would be interesting if teams may be using this heat to soften their rear wings when desirable. You could conceivably direct exhaust, brake and wheel temperatures toward the endplates and heat them up, with the soft members warmed up enough to flex under load.

[Sevach]

Both front and rear wings bending down under load it's a natural thing, there's often questions on how much of it is too much, different flexion in different parts of the wing, but to some degree it's present on every car.

The RW opening a slot under load an unnatural action.
It must be specifically engineered to act in this fashion, why the FIA doesn't wanna move to combat this is beyond me.

Previously playing in the gray areas always came with a risk that your toys could be taken away at any moment, most teams have been hit by this, Ferrari and Red Bull have been targets of that many times.
The FIA stance in this case in encouraging this type of design beyond the usual profit.

[organic]

Both front and rear wings bending down under load it's a natural thing, there's often questions on how much of it is too much, different flexion in different parts of the wing, but to some degree it's present on every car.

The RW opening a slot under load an unnatural action.
It must be specifically engineered to act in this fashion, why the FIA doesn't wanna move to combat this is beyond me.

Previously playing in the gray areas always came with a risk that your toys could be taken away at any moment, most teams have been hit by this, Ferrari and Red Bull have been targets of that many times.
The FIA stance in this case in encouraging this type of design beyond the usual profit.

They don't want to undermine the show. Is obvious

[Farnborough]

It surprises me that no one .... the great Internet, journalist scource, contributors on here ... all, none have come up with exactly what rule is being breeched in this wing case.

Looks invisible to me, like "whistling in the wind" with no specific metric to say what it should be.

If there's no specific control for the structural deformation of that flap, then it's not controlled. How can it be ?

People keep quoting much hairy fairy phrase on this, that's not a means to determine technical limits.

Soooo ... what are they being measured against ?

[leblanc]

It surprises me that no one .... the great Internet, journalist scource, contributors on here ... all, none have come up with exactly what rule is being breeched in this wing case.

TD34

[Sevach]

They don't want to undermine the show. Is obvious

They did affect the show previously.

And also, Mclaren has already overhauled Red Bull and can do it to in the drivers championship and not much Verstappen can do, he's depending on Ferrari (and ironically Piastri) to defend him.

[Farnborough]

It surprises me that no one .... the great Internet, journalist scource, contributors on here ... all, none have come up with exactly what rule is being breeched in this wing case.

TD34

Are you going to quote it and give reason as to it's ability to give overarching control of measurement in this case ?

[Farnborough]

Here's a quote from another site about TD34

" The TD034G technical directive has been sent to all Formula 1 teams by Nikolas Tombazis, the FIA Single Seater Director, so they can place the markers on the front wings of their respective cars. It should be remembered that Technical Directives are sent exclusively to the teams. They are not a rule and they are the method of enforcing it. At the same time, a technical directive could determine a regulatory review if certain numerical values vary as a limit. In such a case, the regulation article would be modified. For example, if the mass to be applied in the flex test or the flexion limit amplitude were to change.'

So, who has knowledge of the rules specifically relating to and controlling flex of that component ? Is there such a thing, very illusive so far

Whats the test method, what's the limit etc, tbat would give us here a clear view.