Flexible wings controversy 2010

[BreezyRacer]

these superslomos give some insight I think only 2009 ..watch the interesting pivoting motion of the redbullfront wing it tilts down at the back only it seems...
unfortunatelly this years Grandprix in hockenheim was broadcasted by Ecclestone...no more superslomos...

http://www.motorator.com/videos/792

Interesting video. That first car BTW was a Torro Rosso. The Red Bull (last in the video) had almost no movement. At any rate that's really pretty much shock/bump related movement. I'm sure what everyone wants to focus on is wing flex under aero load. IMO, it's pretty damn hard to keep one of these wings from having some flex at full downforce. The RB and Ferrari passed the tests so "no problem".

[ecapox]

I think this image will show you what all the fuss is about.

the camera is mounted to the car body ,and placing your curser on other parts of the car demonstartes the car itself is not moving relative to the camera it is just the suspension AND the wing ...

this is obvious since a long time ..

Put your cursor at the top of the right tire. You can see that the tire shifts position leaving your cursor by the smallest amount. Also, look at the line on the inside of the right tire in relation to the top red line...it also moves. I think the wing may flex a tiny amount and the video/picture exaggerate the effect.

EDIT. Hell, i dont know. If i stare at this thing any longer im going to have a seizure.

[SiLo]

Oh dear. I watched that on my iPod with a tiny screen and I could see the huge amount of flex on that wing. Now I can understand why Mclaren were complaining because that is illegal. Or in my eyes it is.

[ecapox]

Im confused.

If something passes the FIA tests, how can it be illegal? By definition passing the FIA mandated tests means it is legal.

Everything flexes on a F1 car. Everything. What the rules and tests do is mandate that at a certain weight/pressure that a part doesnt deflect more than a set amount. If i stood on front wing, it would flex (probably break) but i bet i could apply enough pressure to make it flex before it broke. That doesnt mean the wing is illegal.

On another thought, i wonder when this front wing test was adopted. If it has been the same for 10 years, maybe it's about time they changed it. Could just be an outdated test that needs to be modified.

[djos]

Perhaps if MacMerc was generating as much front wing DF as RedBull then their wing would droop down at the ends under load too!

[Holm86]

viewtopic.php?f=12&t=7658&start=1575

great picture in this thread.

[Holm86]

And the wings are perfectly legal when they pass the test.

The question is if the test is good enough to test the flexing in wings. Because its perfectly clear in the rules that the wings must not flex and these wings flex quite alot so must be the test that isnt good enough.

[FrukostScones]

I dont see any flexing here, maybe it is just the working suspension that creates this visual effect! First pic maybe brake pitch, second slow on a straight!

[dan]

I don't think the wing is moving much the front squats down under braking and lifts under acceleration from the rear wheels

I think this image will show you what all the fuss is about.

[img]http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/381/rb6china.gif[img]

The suspension is also moving. When the suspension is higher, looks like the wing is lower. In the lower wign picture it also looks like he is turning.

If any of that makes any difference....

[rayden]

are you guys saying its been doing what its doing since malaysia, and it's taken everyone this long to notice?

[TRICKLE69]

If I am not mistaken adjustable front wings are still allowed this year and maybe the movable element is what is flexing. The video is not clear as to what is moving.

[Remote_Access]

I dont see any flexing here, maybe it is just the working suspension that creates this visual effect! First pic maybe brake pitch, second slow on a straight!

Guys, the red lines are in the same position relative to the chassis in both images. The front wing is clearly changing position. The position of the wheels is irrelevant, as the concern is that the wing is moving relative to the chassis. There is no optical illusion, as the red lines avoid that.

Let's not argue trivial points about suspension geometry, let us debate possible explanations for the wing flex.

[Robbobnob]

to me it seems that the first shot in which the cars wing is lower, by looking at the timing board it shows that Webber is on Pole... the second picture has vettel on pole and webber second...

using Deductive reasoning i conclude that vettel is at full tilt on the first shot and the second shot possibly he has slowed to conserve fuel for the mandatory sample?

Also bare in mind the astronomical forces being placed on those wings with the combined lift and drag. it is perfectly understandable that you would get some deflection by pure mechanical bending

[Remote_Access]

The allegation is not that the wings are 'bending' under load. Such a deflection is straightforward mechanics and a deflection test for bending is used already.

The allegation is that somehow the wing is twisting, ie tipping forward or backward (I'm not sure which but I would imagine backward) and therefore lowering the endplates.

As for the suggestion that they might just be experimenting with different wing heights, the minimum height is specified at 75mm (I think) above reference plane and running the wing lower will improve its efficiency due to ground effect. So this is not a setup issue, as teams would not bother trying to run a higher wing.

It may be helpful to identify exactly where the images were captured to determine the speeds involved. It looks like China, end of pit straight and then en route to turn 7. The latter image would probably be a much lower velocity as it would be Vettel's in lap.

[feynman]

Darren Heath ... bendy bendy: