Forum menu
Even tiny deflections in large aerodynamic surfaces make a massive difference to drag.
One of the Aircarft wings we designed was manufactured 0.07deg out of position and the result was a 2% increase in fuel burn.
nickc
Full Member
No more dodgy than a steering wheel you can pull on to adjust the toe-in of the front wheels…
It really is - Mercedes told the FIA about DAS to make sure it was compliant. Redbull seems to have specifically designed their wing to pass the test, but still deflect due to asymmetric loading. The rule is quite clear. NO moveable aerodynamic device. That's a rule violation.
It also seems that the FIA are aware that RBs wing will fail the test and are giving them the chance to sort it without a penalty. Christian Horner was his usual deft wordsmith self when asked if the wing was complaint, he said that the wing passed all of tests...It's not the same thing and he knows it.
It's just F1 innit! 🙂
Flexi-wings have been used for donkeys years. If your's passes the tests then your design team have done their job well.
Horner has answered the question. As the rules are currently enforced it’sa legal car which is all it has to be.
@Daffy, yes you're correct, I forgot that DAS was legal. I guess what I meant is that teams are always trying to push the limits of the regulations.
In addition to new, more targeted static tests, the FIA plans to use on-board cameras to monitor the behaviour of wings while cars are in motion in an attempt to spot any excessive movement of bodywork.
looks like the chap that put the camera on the back of the F1 car for the classic Monaco race will get his wish for it to be on a current F1 car earlier than expected!
All F1 wings will flex to some extent - materials being like that and all - so the no moveable aerodynamic device can not mean absolutely no flex.
It can only mean flexes less than a certain amount under certain conditions - or in other words passes a test.
Red Bull do appear to have gotten a good amount of flex while still passing the criteria - which will lead to tighter criteria.
But everyone will have been designing as close to that criteria as possible - and if others have to strengthen a wing to pass the test that didn’t actually flex that much on the racetrack it might be them that lose out.
I think the FIA are considering cameras monitoring the wings for that reason but good luck with interpreting the result and the challenges that follow
Wow! That’s way more movement than I expected to see.
Me too - a quite visible change in wing shape which is surely going to have a significant affect on straight line speed.
That’s the difference between doing a job and doing what you love which happens to be your job. Hamilton seems to be absolutely LOVING driving at the moment. So why not stay and get paid for it?
That’s the crux of it. Hamilton chuffin loves racing. When he’s got competition he gets even better, you never want to see him in your mirrors! If he sees that he’ll have a new younger driver - hopefully Russell - who has already proven himself in a Merc by beating Bottas he will just see it as a challenge and love it even more!
The guy just seems unstoppable. Did you see the interview with C4 guys, he was saying he was up till well last midnight the day before the last race going though ways to improve the car with the engineers. He is also still very fit and doesn’t seem to be showing any lack of talent/sharpness/eagerness compared to Verstappen.
The only thing I think that will change his mind about racing is if the Merc team changes a lot and he doesn’t have that really tight knit team round him, maybe a new boss would change the dynamic?
9 or 10 time world champion? I don’t think I’d bet against it.
The rear wing issue - I wonder how they test for deflection to see if it’s within the rules? That video of the bending seems to show that it flexes from the bottom of the wing structure, maybe where it is attached - not the top pieces. If the testing is done off the car maybe it won’t reflect real world usage?
I am guessing the FIA have already thought about that but it got me thinking.
The test is a static one where they apply a set load at a certain point or points to simulate aero loading at a given speed. The part is allowed to move a certain distance before it fails the test. The thing is with carbon fibre (and any other laminate) is that you can engineer in progressive/regressive rates of flex so what RedBull have done is engineer the layup to be stiff enough to pass the test but any more load makes it flex more. They did exactly the same thing with the front wings a few years ago. All very clever and within the letter of the rules but not the spirit.
It's just another example of the team pushing the envelope and waiting for the rule makers to catch up. Same as McLaren with their DRS tubes through the chassis, the second brake pedal or Brabham with the 'Fan Car'. Brilliant lateral thinking that makes the technical side so interesting. RedBull will have been waiting for the wing to be spotted and just making the most of it until then, same with every team.
If the testing is done off the car maybe it won’t reflect real world usage?
I believe the load tests are carried out on full cars during scrutineering at races. iirc some of them are quite simple - hang a certain weight off the wing, if it moves more than a set amount you get done for it. Also iirc on front wings they (RB) changed the wing so that when the FIA started looking at deflection they changed the design to twist it instead. Suppose these are the tricks you can pull if you're Adrian Newey!
All very clever and within the letter of the rules but not the spirit.
I don't believe that it is within the letter of the law, they have designed it to comply with the tests, not the actual law, it's like VW's emissions test workaround, or drugs cheats never falling a test.
What does the law actually state?
Most specifications can only be interpreted in light of how you measure them.
Like your 230V electricity supply into your house for example.
What does the law actually state?
That moving aero surfaces is a no-no. However, as said above, there will always be some flex so it starts to get murky at that point, then there’s the “we pass the test” part too. It’s all just what they’ve been doing since F1 started
From the BBC
Article 3.8 of the F1 technical regulations states that bodywork must be "rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car" and "remain immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car".
So the test itself isn't the law, it was just a method of testing probable compliance, if RB have designed the wing to flex under the load created by speed but remain rigid under the specific test that is breaking the law.
I guess that while it is suspected that it is a design feature rather than a design accident they can't prove it, so have issued guidance and updated future testing rather than punishment.
You can only enforce a rule by means of a standardised test, so it is by passing the test(s) that you show compliance with the rule.
'Interpreting' the rules is, rightly or wrongly, an intrinsic part of racing, see BOM Bargain Racement suspension mods, some of the whoppers pulled in WRC, NASCAR etc.
For me it's all part of the fun, I imagine the other teams will be thinking "why didn't we think of that?" rather than "It's not FAIR!"
You can only enforce a rule by means of a standardised test, so it is by passing the test(s) that you show compliance with the rule.
Yes, but passing the test doesn't mean the car is compliant with the law, just that it passed the test. The Ferrari fuel flow scandal is an example of that thinking taken too far. IIRC, they were measuring fuel flow once per second and the Ferrari was compliant with that, but they were increasing the flow between tests. The rule was that fuel flow had to remain below a certain threshold and Ferrari were in deliberate breach, despite passing the tests.
The rule on flexi wings is that they are supposed to be quite rigid, with only minimal deflection under load. Designing them to pass the static load test but to flex in operation is deliberate non-compliance, even if they pass the tests. This is not the same as designing them to flex to the limit of what is allowed, which is what any designer should be doing.
Turkey cancelled, second Austrian GP instead
Grosjean takes his first pole in Indycar at the GP of Indianapolis.
Would love to see him take the win tomorrow.
🤦♂️
Oh, we’re backing out of those sort of jokes now, are we? Righto 🙂
Nice!! Very nice...
LOVE Gulf Racing colours!
That and Martini were some of the best.
What is the relevance of Gulf colours on the McLaren at Monaco?
Forget the question. Just checked on F1.com. Very pretty.
That Gulf livery needs to stay!
What is the relevance of Gulf colours on the McLaren at Monaco?
it’s more interesting than the race usually is
McLaren have run in full Gulf colours only once previously - at Le Mans in 1997, with the McLaren F1 GTR
Noobs. 97 was 50:50 Gulf:Davidoff, ‘95 and ‘96 had full Gulf colours
^^^ Very Good
I think the only question isn't whether Mazespin crashes out it when. We should run a pool!
My money is on binning it hard enough in Free Practice that he can't qualify, i'm thinking massive tankslapper into the wall at Tabac.
He then gets given 20th on the grid and then understeers off at Saint Devote on the first lap.
a crashstappen clip the inside wall coming out of the swimming pool and into the wall opposite.
Monaco - who can forget Ricardo Rosset here memorably stuffing his Tyrrell into the barriers in a half-arsed attempt to doughnut the car around so that it was pointing in the correct direction:
Fun fact - Rosset's pit crew were so incensed at his ineptitude that they swapped the letters around on Rosset's pit lane scooter so that they read "tosseR".
Rosset's stunning effort is probably the Monaco gold standard of rubbishness - Mazepin has had a very high bar set for him.
A spin a Rascasse on lap 1 of free practice of Friday.
I’ve got a fiver on colliding with one of the front/midfield runners in qualifying and then not making it to the tunnel in the race.
Looks like I picked the wrong season to quit betting against a safety car.
That McLaren looks stunning, should look epic during qualifying.
We should run a pool!
He won't make it that far round the first lap out of the pits.
Grand Hotel hairpin I reckon, it's deceptively tricky being the slowest corner in the entire F1 calendar. Either that or he'll nerf Latifi off while at Sainte Devote. One place where you really don't want a rookie with attitude issues is Monte Carlo, the potential for havoc is off the chart.
I am very keen on McLaren's Gulf livery, if Ricciardo can get his confidence up this weekend then we may well see an orange and blue podium.
This might make things messy if the title race is still close at the and and we end up with races being cancelled, especially if it comes down to the Merc and Red Bull having circuit specific advantages. Will also complicate the planning of when to switch fully to the 2022 car development.
https://twitter.com/p__matt/status/1394541028321943553
Fun fact – Rosset’s pit crew were so incensed at his ineptitude that they swapped the letters around on Rosset’s pit lane scooter so that they read “tosseR”.
"It's a very short debate, Murray."
Still giggling at that.
Lando Norris secures a "multi-year contract" at McLaren.
Lando Norris secures a “multi-year contract” at McLaren.
Hope they can deliver the car to let him make use of his talent!