Flexible wings controversy 2010

[horse]

Can someone explain to me the mechanism for the flexing of the floor being able to change the height of the front wing? Is the floor changing the angle of attack of the nose cone? For that to happen, though, surely the whole chassis would be tipped? I'm a confused little pony.

[kalinka]

The flexible bodywork tests are being beefed up again for Monza. Surely these tests will cut it out more than the Spa tests.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/86109

I just read it. Felxi-floor test...hmmm..At least it prooves us on this forum that we are not that stupid at all It has to be something behind our speculations about flexing floors/wings, and I was sure before, that these increased-weight FIA tests are not enough to catch the ( cheating? ) teams. Will be interesting to see Monza onboard shots.

[segedunum]

I doubt it. It's getting a little annoying seeing Mercedes and McLaren shooting in the dark and prodding the FIA to change tests right, left and centre.

From what we've see on this thread I doubt whether there is much body flexing. I'm sure the nose on the Red Bull is coming down slightly to aid the effect, but the amount that it does so is probably well within tolerances. The real trickery is in the layups they're using on the front wing sections and the aerodynamics they're using to create the force required for the flexing, which possibly has a side-effect of pulling the nose down slightly.

I'm surprised that opposing teams have prodded for this additional floor and body test at Monza. It's clear that it's the wing itself that is flexing and this is not being caused by the front body lowering because the amount the wing lowers is not uniform.

[marcush.]

Can someone explain to me the mechanism for the flexing of the floor being able to change the height of the front wing? Is the floor changing the angle of attack of the nose cone? For that to happen, though, surely the whole chassis would be tipped? I'm a confused little pony.

the plank (stepplane ) of the car is the lowest part of the car .It starts 330 mm
behind the front axle line and ends on the rear axle line.
So if you want to run the front wing as low as possible the leading edge of the plank will be the hinge point and you will have to raise the rear axle height to make the front wing drop....the car wheelbase -330mm is roughly 3000mm the front wing around 1000mm forward of this hingepoint:So top get the front wing 30mm closer to the ground ..you need something like 100mm rideheight at the rear...

the picture above ...the light sidesd part of the plank shows clearly were it touches the ground..plank is spraypainted black to show the team were it touches the ground.

Now lift the splitter a bit pulling the plank up the same amount and your effective hingepoint (contact point of the plank goes backwards to the point where the plank is fixed to the car bottom ...an estimated 500 mm further back ..
so now the hinge point is say at 2500mm and the front lever is suddenly also 1500mm !..for only 50 mm in rideheight increase at the rear your front wing is the same 30mm closer to the ground ....significant...isn´t it ?

[horse]

Now lift the splitter a bit pulling the plank up the same amount and your effective hingepoint (contact point of the plank goes backwards to the point where the plank is fixed to the car bottom ...an estimated 1000mm further back.

Thanks marcush, I think I get it. Basically, I think you're saying that the floor is becoming bow shaped. I believe, that if this is the case, then they will get extra benefits from the floor taking this profile as this will effectively increase the diffuser angle at the same time. However, engineering the car to take this attitude must be pretty challenging.

[marcush.]

Now lift the splitter a bit pulling the plank up the same amount and your effective hingepoint (contact point of the plank goes backwards to the point where the plank is fixed to the car bottom ...an estimated 1000mm further back.

Thanks marcush, I think I get it. Basically, I think you're saying that the floor is becoming bow shaped. I believe, that if this is the case, then they will get extra benefits from the floor taking this profile as this will effectively increase the diffuser angle at the same time. However, engineering the car to take this attitude must be pretty challenging.

I have posted a link to racecar engineering were they had an interview with steve nevey about designed flexing of carbonfibrestructures...that was at the end of last year and the guy did openly admit to that this is what they do.they design the parts to flex as needed under load..

Nobody has been able to look into the suspension rocker layout of the RB6 front ..
could it be that springloads are deliberately fed into areas that bow under a maximum load?
I hear the bell ringinging with RedBull changing tubs quite often and claiming
some minor damage that could have had an influence...blabla.. maybe that were the teething problems in introducing the tub to controlled flexing.

[n_anirudh]

From autosport:

FIA to toughen up flexi-tests again

The FIA is to ramp up its flexi bodywork tests further for the Italian Grand Prix, AUTOSPORT has learned, in a move to stop teams gaining a potential unfair advantage.

Although it is widely known that the FIA is to increase the loads it uses to test deflection of the front wings from this weekend's Belgian Grand Prix, sources have revealed that even more action is to be taken for the next event in Monza.

Amid mounting speculation that the lower front wings observed on the Red Bull Racing and Ferrari cars are being put into use through clever flexing of the car's floor, rather than the wings flexing down themselves, the FIA is to introduce extra tests on the underside area of the car.

In a document sent to teams during the summer break by Charlie Whiting, FIA technical chiefs have been informed that extra tests are to take place on the floor of the chassis - especially in the 'tea tray' area at the front edge.

The teams have not been told exactly what the tests will be - only that they will take place 380mm behind the front wheel centre line at points 100mm either side of the car centre line.

Furthermore, it is understood that the FIA is to revise the regulations regarding skid blocks, to ensure that joints in this area do not allow freedom that could help the floor to flex.

From the Italian Grand Prix it is understood that the skid block can comprise of no more than two pieces, and that no piece of the skid block can be less than one metre long. A number of teams are understood to use several sections of skid block on the underside of their floor.

To further ensure teams are not deflecting the floor, from Monza all joints, bearing pivots and any other form of articulation must also be fixed.

The move by the FIA comes on the back of weeks of controversy about flexible front wings - with Red Bull Racing and Ferrari's designs having come under intense scrutiny.

At the Hungarian Grand Prix, McLaren team principal Martin Whitmarsh said he was surprised by what he had observed on the Red Bull Racing and Ferrari cars.

"Clearly no wing can be infinitely rigid, but there are limits to which they should be allowed to flex," he said. "If you try to explain what is happening, either you can explain it by hugely raked cars - but if you do simple geometry then the ride height would be over 100mm and there is no evidence of that being the case.

"Or you do it by some means of the outer edge of the wings lowering down by more than we expect. Or the front of the floor is moving up further than we expect, because that is another part of bodywork that is intended to be rigidly attached.

"In truth we don't understand it and maybe there is another way but I, as a fairly simple engineer, can't think of anything other than those three explanations. If there is another one then I will be happy to hear it. It is surprising.

"I think the FIA has got to take a view now of what is acceptable, and if it is acceptable, to get the endplates down. Every millimetre is about one point of downforce at the front, although it also improves the rear. So 25-30mm of vertical lowering of the endplates is one second [per lap], so it is fairly substantial."

[thestig84]

I have already posted that link. Fair enough I didnt copy and paste the whole lot but please read other peoples posts fully.

[kalinka]

I doubt it. It's getting a little annoying seeing Mercedes and McLaren shooting in the dark and prodding the FIA to change tests right, left and centre.

I didn't say that flexi wings are flexing just because of flexi floors. It's clearly visible that the wing is felxing on its own. But i'm just saying that FIA tests are pointing towards the flexing floor possibility too. And flexi floors were not mentioned officially before Hungary if I remember correctly, so the problem is there for sure, if FIA reacts that fast.

[kalinka]

I hear the bell ringinging with RedBull changing tubs quite often and claiming
some minor damage that could have had an influence...blabla.. maybe that were the teething problems in introducing the tub to controlled flexing.

+1

[747heavy]

@MArcus

I understand what you want to say, and agree in part with your theory.
For me it would be interesting to see a photo from the leg/pedal area inside
the RB6 tub. Would be interesting to see, if there are maybe some "funny" brackets placed aound the ancorpoint of the third sping etc.

Anyhow, I would think, that the front wing of the car pivots around the front axle line (if you raise the rear RH) and the rear axle line (if you lower the font RH), not the tip of plank/splitter.

Sure you need the plank "out of the way" to lower the front RH, otherwise it will contact the ground, and you can´t get it lower, but I would not say the leading edge is the pivot/hinge point of the car.

Sorry if I may have understood what you want to say wrong.

[747heavy]

another "flexing floor"

[marcush.]

747h ..
of course you are right in real world ...but my reasoning is not taking into account the wheels at all.In fact they do not come into the equation at all .
I should have not used the term pivot or pivoting point ,as in fact it is just the point of contact with the road surface as the car goes into a bump situation.as soon as your STIFF plank touches the ground nothing will make your front wing come closer to the ground ,except raising the rear rideheight.Of course in doing this you will also lift the plank a tiny bit of the ground but hey ...being nitpicky there it would rise 5mm so you´dcan lower the front those 5mil and the leading edge of the plank is back on the ground...see ? you can take the front wheels of for this ... they do not come into the equation.
pulling the splitter up under load will move the contact point quickly rearward and this will dramatically alter the possibilities to get the wing further down

I just love Adrian for his ideas.. =D> =D>

I wonder if its really just the tub or if they use the springforces in a more mechanical /direct ways.

[747heavy]

just found that graph,
nothing world moving, but shows, that you still could pass the new FIA front wing test, and have a non-linear deflecting/flexing front wing, all the while.



and an illustration (crude one ) for the idea of an mechanical interlock, which get´s removed by the drag force of the wing (backwards movement of the top flap).

[747heavy]

just for giggles
RB5 floor from the beginning of last year, so either the idea is not all that new, or some people just head off for a wild goose chase, to distract from their own "incompetence" (read limited creativity) !?!?