Ferrari front wing

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.
User avatar
Sawtooth-spike
0
Joined: 28 Jan 2005, 15:33
Location: Cambridge

Post

i think what is important in Both Case (the Front and The rear wing) is how the FIA deal with this Issue, Last year the FIA Banned BAR for The Fuel tank thing, Because they interpreted the rules to say that they could run it in that way, which the the stewards said they could but then the FIA took over and Banned them. Now Fans of f1 were told what BAR had done, But if it was not something you could see on track, its was some that a casual watcher of f1 would never see or know anything about.
Now the Ferrari issue is VERY public, every single f1 Fan could see the front wing moving and the rear wing flexing (BMW and Mclaren included). The rear wing issue has been delt with and we should not see what we have seen in the last 2 races again.

However the Front wing the FIA need to Do something, Do they:

-Do nothing, there for allowing all other teams to push the rules of flex to the maximum, Also creating more negitive feeling towards ferrari because of the "They can do what they like" feeling that has been brewing over the years.

-Ask Ferrari to Change there front wing so that it does not flex, This would be a good move, but would be seen by some as "Ferrari getting away with it", But it encourages teams to push the grey areas of the rules, with out fear of being banned.

-The only other option i see is to Ban ferrari or reprimand them for this, this would stop the ferrari "Can do what they like" feeling around some f1 fans, and would show teams that grey areas of the rules are VERY dangerous to play with.

But over all Ferrari have publicly done something dodgy and the FIA need to Set a president on this issue.


I hope this all makes sence.
I believe in the chain of command, Its the chain I use to beat you till you do what i want!!!

kilcoo316
kilcoo316
21
Joined: 09 Mar 2005, 16:45
Location: Kilcoo, Ireland

Post

Sawtooth-spike wrote:i think what is important in Both Case (the Front and The rear wing) is how the FIA deal with this Issue, Last year the FIA Banned BAR for The Fuel tank thing, Because they interpreted the rules to say that they could run it in that way, which the the stewards said they could but then the FIA took over and Banned them. Now Fans of f1 were told what BAR had done, But if it was not something you could see on track, its was some that a casual watcher of f1 would never see or know anything about.


I hope this all makes sense.
No not really.

When did the race stewards say to BAR it was all right to run with their dodgy collector tank?

The Technical regs clearly state:
The weight of the car must not be less than 605kg during the qualifying practice session and no less than
600kg at all other times during the Event.
While the flexibility bodywork states:
3.17 Bodywork flexibility :

3.17.1 Bodywork may deflect no more than 5mm vertically when a 500N load is applied vertically to it 700mm forward of the front wheel centre line and 625mm from the car centre line. The load will be applied in a
downward direction using a 50mm diameter ram and an adapter 300mm long and 150mm wide. Teams must supply the latter when such a test is deemed necessary.

3.17.2 Bodywork may deflect no more than 10mm vertically when a 500N load is applied vertically to it 450mm forward of the rear wheel centre line and 650mm from the car centre line. The load will be applied in a
downward direction using a 50mm diameter ram and an adapter of the same size, Teams must supply the latter when such a test is deemed necessary.

3.17.3 Bodywork may deflect by no more than one degree horizontally when a load of 1000N is applied simultaneously to its extremities in a rearward direction 780mm above the reference plane and 20mm
forward of the rear wheel centre line.

3.17.4 Bodywork may deflect no more than 5mm vertically when a 500N load is applied vertically to it at a point which lies on the car centre line and 380mm rearward of the front wheel centre line. The load will be
applied in an upward direction using a 50mm diameter ram, teams will be required to supply a suitable adapter when such a test is deemed necessary.

3.17.5 The uppermost aerofoil element lying behind the rear wheel centre line may deflect no more than 5mm horizontally when a 500N load is applied horizontally. The load will be applied 800mm above the reference
plane at three separate points which lie on the car centre line and 250mm either side of it. The loads will be applied in an rearward direction using a suitable 25mm wide adapter which must be supplied by the
relevant team.

3.17.6 The forward-most aerofoil element lying behind the rear wheel centre line and which lies more than 600mm above the reference plane may deflect no more than 2mm vertically when a 200N load is applied vertically. The load will be applied in line with the trailing edge of the element at any point across its width. The loads will be applied using a suitable adapter, supplied by the relevant team, which :
- may be no more than 50mm wide ;
- which extends no more than 10mm forward of the trailing edge ;
- incorporates an 8mm female thread in the underside.



3.17.7 In order to ensure that the requirements of Article 3.15 are respected, the FIA reserves the right to
introduce further load/deflection tests on any part of the bodywork which appears to be (or is suspected of),
moving whilst the car is in motion.

Now tell me where it specifically states that at no time must the bodywork deflect more than X amount.


Two totally different rulings, the latter having scope around its set targets for the designers to work around, the former clearly has no room for manoeuvre.

User avatar
Sawtooth-spike
0
Joined: 28 Jan 2005, 15:33
Location: Cambridge

Post

yes i know that,

But what i am saying is that the BAR cheating issue was something that the public could not see, what i am saying is that everybody with eyes can see the Ferrari wings Flexing, which is questionable.
I believe in the chain of command, Its the chain I use to beat you till you do what i want!!!

kilcoo316
kilcoo316
21
Joined: 09 Mar 2005, 16:45
Location: Kilcoo, Ireland

Post

Sawtooth-spike wrote:yes i know that,

But what i am saying is that the BAR cheating issue was something that the public could not see, what i am saying is that everybody with eyes can see the Ferrari wings Flexing, which is questionable.
But BAR were in clear violation of the rules as they are written down!

Ferrari are absolutely 100% totally legal (as the rules are written).


If the FIA tried to retrospectively act, it would get very messy (lawyers etc), as ferrari are in the right. All they can do is re-define the flex test points to reduce it further.

User avatar
Sawtooth-spike
0
Joined: 28 Jan 2005, 15:33
Location: Cambridge

Post

They have passed the test, yes that makes them legal, i am not disputing that. What i am saying is that what they are doing is not in the spirt of the rules and very Obvisosly to anybody who can see.
I believe in the chain of command, Its the chain I use to beat you till you do what i want!!!

kilcoo316
kilcoo316
21
Joined: 09 Mar 2005, 16:45
Location: Kilcoo, Ireland

Post

Sawtooth-spike wrote:They have passed the test, yes that makes them legal, i am not disputing that. What i am saying is that what they are doing is not in the spirt of the rules and very Obvisosly to anybody who can see.
Believe me, they are all breaking the 'spirit' of the rules. I know for instance, that certain teams have specifically tailored CFD coding for non-linear flexure under aero loads.

AKA they get the thing to meet the FIA crash test by obeying Young's modulus up to that point, then its much more flexible and can give them these effects.

And the team in question is a mid-grid team, they are all at it!

User avatar
Sawtooth-spike
0
Joined: 28 Jan 2005, 15:33
Location: Cambridge

Post

yup, But the wing was moving in clear view of the camera, you dont need to be a techy to see it. Everybody does it, but just not about 1 foot infront of the camera
I believe in the chain of command, Its the chain I use to beat you till you do what i want!!!

dumrick
dumrick
0
Joined: 19 Jan 2004, 13:36
Location: Portugal

Post

Ferrari has now declared that they are no longer running that wing, not because they were told to, but because of performance issues.

Translation: they are getting away with cheating and we (the spectators) are been treated as fools.

After been forced to watch 2 races without BAR's last year for a controversially illegal detail that no one saw (and that never was clear that the car could actually run under minimum weight, just that a part of that fuel weight would not be in the tank but rather in an accumulator), we now see the all-mighty we-can-get-away-with-a-turbine-engine-if-we-want reds not even be reprimended for what they've done in front of the all world's eyes...

The question here is not material science's deformation per se (as in the rear wing's issue where, since they flex in a predetermined direction under aero loads, the total displacement and final shape under deformation is studied to maximize performance, complying with FIA's tests), but to have a special design to take advantage of material deformation to change the shape of an aero component, make it deform in some particular axis that are not those according to which a wing would flex, if fixed in a rigid way.

User avatar
Principessa
0
Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 14:36
Location: Zottegem Belgium

Post

Image

Image

User avatar
flynfrog
Moderator
Joined: 23 Mar 2006, 22:31

Post

dumrick wrote:Ferrari has now declared that they are no longer running that wing, not because they were told to, but because of performance issues.

Translation: they are getting away with cheating and we (the spectators) are been treated as fools.

After been forced to watch 2 races without BAR's last year for a controversially illegal detail that no one saw (and that never was clear that the car could actually run under minimum weight, just that a part of that fuel weight would not be in the tank but rather in an accumulator), we now see the all-mighty we-can-get-away-with-a-turbine-engine-if-we-want reds not even be reprimended for what they've done in front of the all world's eyes...

The question here is not material science's deformation per se (as in the rear wing's issue where, since they flex in a predetermined direction under aero loads, the total displacement and final shape under deformation is studied to maximize performance, complying with FIA's tests), but to have a special design to take advantage of material deformation to change the shape of an aero component, make it deform in some particular axis that are not those according to which a wing would flex, if fixed in a rigid way.
so much hate wheres the love

racing is all about cheating within the rules the wing passes all of the FIA tests. Running a car under weight is flat cheating and an under weight car is illeagal and can be tested.

But I understand you hate the red cars and what every advantage they find must be cheating and the FIA is there puppy right :roll:

ginsu
ginsu
0
Joined: 17 Jan 2006, 02:23

Post

It's clear to see from Principessa's pictures that Ferrari have actually improved the design of their flexible wing. You can see the red fairing on the nose cone which I assume is to divert the air around the flexible connection.

It seems like a logical improvement to the design, but I thought that they were not going to run this wing at all. Instead they made it better.
I love to love Senna.

manchild
manchild
12
Joined: 03 Jun 2005, 10:54

Post

If that is a fairing meant to prevent cam from recording illegal motion of the wing than they've "made it better" but if those wings are now fixed to nose than they've lost performance for sure.

ginsu
ginsu
0
Joined: 17 Jan 2006, 02:23

Post

Yes, I was thinking it was a fairing and does not actually connect the wing to the chassis. It's hard to tell from the picture. Hopefully they'll stick another camera to watch the wing on schummie's car for Australia.
I love to love Senna.

User avatar
kkobayash
0
Joined: 19 Jan 2006, 03:52
Location: Sydney, Australia

Post

from the onboards that i saw of the ferrari in practice, it seems like the wings connected to the nose now, with that red 'fairing'.

ginsu
ginsu
0
Joined: 17 Jan 2006, 02:23

Post

The problem is that we don't know if the little red fairing and the wing are actually connected. This could be similar to the fairing on the upper front wishbones on the McLaren. Sorry, but I am of the disposition that Ferrari are merely covering it up, rather than actually fixing it to the chassis. Although, I'd love to know for sure, one way or the other.
I love to love Senna.