Red Bull and Ferrari front wings

[F1Yorkshire]

So could we also expect to see the Ferraris and Red Bulls at Spa with stiffer, higher wings and the Mclarens much more on their pace? I certainly hope so.

I'm hoping so too. The Macca boys need to get back to the top.

I think there are too many regulations in the sport regarding flexible wings and ride heights. Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought a lot of these regulations were brought in after Senna's death due to the cars been too fast and dangerous.

In the years since that tragedy the cars have become incredible safe as Webber kindly showed us at Valencia so maybe its time to relax some of these crazy regulations and let the designers have more freedom when it comes to producing faster cars.

They will have to allow testing again but as long as they stick to an agreed budget it shouldn't get to the same levels as it was back in the 90's. If a car is faster than another it will be because its designed well and the teams will have go back to the drawing boards to improve their own car instead of constantly moaning that the faster teams have illegal bodywork.

 

[Muddytalker]

They will have to allow testing again but as long as they stick to an agreed budget it shouldn't get to the same levels as it was back in the 90's. If a car is faster than another it will be because its designed well and the teams will have go back to the drawing boards to improve their own car instead of constantly moaning that the faster teams have illegal bodywork.

Yes, I think I can see the problem...

If a team has 10 pots into which they can throw away $200M, and you then take away 3 of those pots, they will still cram the $200M into the remaining 7 pots. You cannot stop a private company spending it's own money, and I'm afraid that history tells us there is no way they will stick to an agreement, gentlemanly or otherwise.

Personally, I'd rather they spent whatever they can afford on testing and spare cars, rather than spending it on the 145th iteration of a complex front wing endplate.

 

[sportsman]

Yes, I think I can see the problem...

If a team has 10 pots into which they can throw away $200M, and you then take away 3 of those pots, they will still cram the $200M into the remaining 7 pots. You cannot stop a private company spending it's own money, and I'm afraid that history tells us there is no way they will stick to an agreement, gentlemanly or otherwise.

Personally, I'd rather they spent whatever they can afford on testing and spare cars, rather than spending it on the 145th iteration of a complex front wing endplate.

Precisely that.That is the very reason that budget caps cannot be enforced.

 

[Brogan]

There's an interesting article on James Allen's site about the new test to come in at Spa.

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2010/08/why-new-fia-flexi-test-wont-clip-red-bulls-wings/

He suggests that it won't really affect Red Bull due to the way the wing is flexing.

 

[snowy]

Yes, though aside from James inferring that extra downforce created by the front wing increases drag he also missed this snippet of info:

It is also understood that the FIA is to clamp down on teams using clever fixings and joints on the underfloor of the car – amid suspicions that this is one area that teams could also be exploiting the regulations.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/85817

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

Sorry if I'm going over old ground or being dim, or both, but I've been thinking (a dangerous thing to do for a 'bear of little brain' like me, I know, but I can't help myself sometiemes).

It seems clear that Red Bull are doing something more clever, as I have suspected for a while, than simply flexing the wings from the support posts. So to achieve this, rather than somehow flexing the whole nosecone downwards relative to the chassis, which seems to me to be something of an impossibility (but what do I know?), could they be doing a combination of three things when the car is travelling at speed:

1. Lowering the car slightly at the front suspension, either by slightly softer settings or some other means
2. Simultaneously raising the car at the rear suspension
3. Flexing the wings themselves so that they are able to get even lower at the endplates

I have no idea how they might achieve 1 and 2 (could it be done with clever aerodynamics?), but it would have the effect of 'tipping' the car forwards about an axis somewhere near the front end of the skid block, which would lower the whole front wing while not significantly lowering the skid block itself to the point where it would hit the track surface. The flexing wings would add an even more lowering at the endplates, explaining why they have been scraping the ground on occcasions.

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

Oh, I forgot to add to my last comment;

The reason why I think the notion that the whole nose could be flexing is unrealistic, is simply because it is part of the crash structure when bolted to the chassis. I don't see how it could with stand the front-end test while simultaneously possessing enough flexibility to bend downwards under speed.

For the same reason, I am also dubious about theories of clever 'hinges' or 'joints' in the floor (which would surely have been picked up by the scrutineers before now anyway, one presumes?)

 

[FB]

I've fianlly found time to read the JA bit and I have to question the logic behind the comments he provides from Frank Dernie. Yes, logically, if Mclaren were to make a simple copy of the Red Bull Flexi-Wing it might have other consequences as the total aero package of the car must be balanced. But, and it's a big but, if Red Bull have limit or eliminate the flexing of their front wing it will have a similar unbalancing effect on the cars total aero package and would move the Red Bulls back, wouldn't it?

 

[F1Yorkshire]

I'm no material or engineering expert but I know enough to know that the same material will behave differently when put under different forces.

Imagine the RB front wing as an egg. When the FIA are doing their flex tests it will be the equivalent of you crushing an egg from either end. The result been the egg stays intact and therefore passes any tests.

Now turn the egg 90 degrees so your crushing the egg from either side. You will end up with an eggy mess. The same theory applies to the RB wing. When the car is racing the same forces are been placed on the material but as they are coming from a different direction to the tests the wing behaves differently, flexing and improving downforce.

I don't know how they have could of constructed the internal structure of the wing but hopefully one of you technical masters will be able to elaborate further.

Until the FIA can accurately replicate the track conditions when conducting the tests there will be ways of fooling them. I'm off to the kitchen now to make myself an omlette.

 

[Brogan]

Until the FIA can accurately replicate the track conditions when conducting the tests

Measuring equipment fixed to the car or a wind tunnel.
Although I don't know the maximum "speed" of a full size wind tunnel.

Edit: Mach 0.36 according to this http://www.onera.fr/gmt-en/wind-tunnels/f1.php, which is 122.5 m/s or about 441 kph.

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

Brogan said:
[quote:3fpqm77h]F1Yorkshire said:
Until the FIA can accurately replicate the track conditions when conducting the tests

Measuring equipment fixed to the car or a wind tunnel.
Although I don't know the maximum "speed of" a full size wind tunnel.[/quote:3fpqm77h]

I thought about that, but don't they test cars and parts at the circuits on race weekends? Otherwise how would teams be able to fly in, for example, overnight wings and fit them between practice and qualifying knowing that they had been declared legal? That would mean having either a permanent wind tunnel at all the circuits or a mobile one that was still big enough to be up to the job. I presume that's the main reason why all the tests are static load tests, that can be carried out in a garage with relatively simple equipment.

 

[F1Yorkshire]

I thought most wind tunnels were not powerful enough to recreate track conditions fully which is why the teams created 2/3rd scale models for testing new parts.

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

With reference to my earlier comment, I note that there is also a lateral load test on the nosecone, so its strength in at least two axes is tested.

18.5 Nose push off test :
During the test the survival cell must be resting on a flat plate and secured to it solidly but not in a way that
could increase the strength of the attachments being tested.
A constant transversal horizontal load of 40.0kN must then be applied to one side of the impact absorbing
structure, using a pad identical to the ones used in the lateral tests in Article 18.2.1, at a point 550mm from
the front wheel axis.
The centre of area of the pad must pass through the plane mentioned above and the mid point of the
height of the structure at the relevant section. After 30 seconds of application, there must be no failure of
the structure or of any attachment between the structure and the survival cell.

The designers would have to be very clever indeed to make a nosecone strong enough to meet the frontal and side tests, yet still flexible enough to bend downwards by around 30 or 40mm at the front wing. I'm not saying it's impossible, just very unlikely.

 

[F1Yorkshire]

The designers would have to be very clever indeed to make a nosecone strong enough to meet the frontal and side tests, yet still flexible enough to bend downwards by around 30 or 40mm at the front wing. I'm not saying it's impossible, just very unlikely.

If any designer is clever enough to do it my money would be on Adrian Newey.

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

F1Yorkshire said:
If any designer is clever enough to do it my money would be on Adrian Newey.

I can't argue with that.

 

[Brogan]

Yes, I meant for this specific case a wind tunnel could be used.

It's obvious (to everyone except the FIA apparently) that the RB wing is illegal under load so why not test it under those conditions?

 

[sportsman]

Why not just stick an 85 mm polystyrene block under the front wing and drive the car on the track.You could carry out this test even on a straight bit of track.Any wear on the block could easily be measured.

The FIA use a similair method by measuring the skid block wear to monitor ride height during the race.

 

[Brogan]

An excellent point sportsman.

The fact that Red Bull engineers have been sanding rough edges off the bottom of the front wing should indicate however that there wouldn't be much left of the polystyrene

 

[rufus_mcdufus]

Going off on a tangent as I'm prone to do, and back to the 'clue' that Vettel's front wing became detached at Silverstone... Rather than this being an indication that something funky is going on in the nosecone itself or with the fixings, might not the failure merely be a result of the far higher downforce that their front wing is generating - i.e enough to break the fixings? Pure speculation of course which no-one could answer but just a thought.

 

[Brogan]

might not the failure merely be a result of the far higher downforce that their front wing is generating - i.e enough to break the fixings?

Funnily enough I had exactly the same thought a few days ago when all the figures about the amount of downforce being generated were bandied about.

There's got to be a link there somewhere...