Rear wing flex and FIA regulatory test 2021

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.
PhillipM
PhillipM
411
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 2:18 pm
Location: Over the road from Boothy...

Re: Rear wing flex and FIA regulatory test 2021

Post

Yes, he said in regards to their options at the track, not versus what competitors were doing.

dans79
dans79
341
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 6:33 pm
Location: USA

Re: Rear wing flex and FIA regulatory test 2021

Post

Wouter wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 4:30 pm
I got my information from Horner who said that Max raced with a medium/high DF wing and Perez with almost the same wing.

Where did you get the information from that "red bull ran their usual lower wing setup that they always run."?
First and foremost you can just look at the wing and see it's not a high DF wing. Look at the end plates/uprights compared to Monaco. Look at the shape and layout of the baku wing compared to Monaco.
Image

I think you will find that Horner meant the wing they ran was "medium/high DF" for this specific circuit, not overall.
169 100 98 7

User avatar
Wouter
572
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: Rear wing flex and FIA regulatory test 2021

Post

dans79 wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 4:52 pm
Wouter wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 4:30 pm
I got my information from Horner who said that Max raced with a medium/high DF wing and Perez with almost the same wing.

Where did you get the information from that "red bull ran their usual lower wing setup that they always run."?
.
First and foremost you can just look at the wing and see it's not a high DF wing. Look at the end plates/uprights compared to Monaco. Look at the shape and layout of the baku wing compared to Monaco.
Image

The first wing up here called Baku wing wasn't the wing Max used during the race.
This wing was only tested during FP1. Photo from FP1 :

Image

Here is the race wing:

Image

I think you will find that Horner meant the wing they ran was "medium/high DF" for this specific circuit, not overall.
I was talking about this circuit, Baku, not about overall.

User avatar
RZS10
203
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 12:23 am

Re: Rear wing flex and FIA regulatory test 2021

Post

That's still just a higher DF version of a low-ish DF wing, just have to compare it to their own wings from Monaco or Spain. Merc was running a lower DF version of a (relatively) high DF wing. The Merc wing def. had more DF than the one used by RBR.

Nabbed from another thread, they're all roughly scaled to the same size:
Image

Edit:
Merc wings Baku (top) and Spain (bottom)
Image

From the previous page:
Image

I'm glad that there were no protest, even if the reasoning ("Eh, it's just Checo") was weird.
Last edited by RZS10 on Tue Jun 08, 2021 8:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Wouter
572
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: Rear wing flex and FIA regulatory test 2021

Post

Wouter wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 7:30 pm
dans79 wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 4:52 pm
First and foremost you can just look at the wing and see it's not a high DF wing. Look at the end plates/uprights compared to Monaco. Look at the shape and layout of the baku wing compared to Monaco.
https://cdn-1.motorsport.com/images/amp ... ar-win.jpg

The first wing up here called Baku wing wasn't the wing Max used during the race.
This wing was only tested during FP1. Photo from FP1 :

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E2-EpVOXwAM ... name=small

Here is the race wing:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E2-AcBwWYAQ ... name=large

I think you will find that Horner meant the wing they ran was "medium/high DF" for this specific circuit, not overall.
I was talking about this circuit, Baku, not about overall.

In addition. I just read this on Motorsport.
By: Giorgio Piola. Co-author: Matt Somerfield . Jun 8, 2021, 7:12 PM

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/red- ... t/6547949/

You might note that the wing shown in the illustration [from @Dans79] also has a section cut away on the trailing edge of the upper flap.

However, whilst that version of the wing made an appearance, it didn’t actually find its way onto the car in a competitive session in Baku but will likely return at the Belgian GP.

User avatar
RZS10
203
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 12:23 am

Re: Rear wing flex and FIA regulatory test 2021

Post

Had another look at the wings and at this point i'm almost convinced that Merc actually built a flexi wing in a few weeks or at least had one planned already or their single pillar supported wing always did that, we never had any footage of that one iirc. It looks like it's almost double the deflection compared to Spain, still ~20% less than RBR who had ~25% less compared to theirs in Spain. img

User avatar
Stu
20
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 9:05 am
Location: Norfolk, UK

Re: Rear wing flex and FIA regulatory test 2021

Post

If that is the case, there is certain level of hypocrisy going on to get a technical advantage; gaming the gaming of the rule book, if you will.
Is it still part of the rules that in order to make an official protest, money has to be put down on the table?

To be fair, I’m sick of the way that the teams use the media to create a ----storm of controversy for a single team (actually one driver within a team) around things that all teams are doing.

The FIA should take a stance and just say to all of the teams “you want to protest? Put the money down, otherwise STFU!”

Most of what is being termed “politics” currently is just ‘click-bait’ and should merely fall into the news category of ‘bitch, whinge, piss & moan’ (which sounds like a high-end firm of solicitors 😂😂).
Common sense is not as common as stupidity, but it is better to be uninformed than to be mis-informed...

Tommy Cookers
Tommy Cookers
559
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 3:55 pm

Re: Rear wing flex and FIA regulatory test 2021

Post

RZS10 wrote:
Wed Jun 02, 2021 12:52 pm
Improved (less literal) translation
Marc Surer: " ...A wing cannot be one hundred percent stiff by the way, otherwise it would break if it wouldn't flex."
this perennial myth is of course utter rubbish
(unless a rigid mass is hitting the wing)

since air is essentially non-rigid
wing flexibility may well increase the stress in the wing even when it doesn't cause change of AoA
if the rate of change of the air load is close to the rate of change of wing internal force with deflection

as a car's suspension spring force increases after going over a bump

User avatar
Sieper
144
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:19 pm

Re: Rear wing flex and FIA regulatory test 2021

Post

Tommy Cookers wrote:
Thu Jun 10, 2021 10:09 am
RZS10 wrote:
Wed Jun 02, 2021 12:52 pm
Improved (less literal) translation
Marc Surer: " ...A wing cannot be one hundred percent stiff by the way, otherwise it would break if it wouldn't flex."
this perennial myth is of course utter rubbish
(unless a rigid mass is hitting the wing)

since air is essentially non-rigid
wing flexibility may well increase the stress in the wing even when it doesn't cause change of AoA
if the rate of change of the air load is close to the rate of change of wing internal force with deflection

as a car's suspension spring force increases after going over a bump
It is not utter rubbish, if there is no flex the pressure on the contact points keeping the wing together would be much greater. Flex certainly helps in a wing not breaking from air pressure. It is not rubbish. Just how much flex is needed, how strong can those connections be engineered. Likely very little flex is actually needed. So it is not rubbish, but also not that critical, to have some flex.
Just a personal interest, a Family recreating a WW2 May 1940 Dutch warbird from scratch: https://www.facebook.com/FlyingFokkerD21/

Tommy Cookers
Tommy Cookers
559
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 3:55 pm

Re: Rear wing flex and FIA regulatory test 2021

Post

Sieper wrote:
Thu Jun 10, 2021 2:22 pm
..... Flex certainly helps in a wing not breaking from air pressure. It is not rubbish. Just how much flex is needed, how strong can those connections be engineered. Likely very little flex is actually needed. So it is not rubbish, but also not that critical, to have some flex.
flex can only make a wing more likely to break from air pressure ....

this is 'structural overshoot' - as in the 'structural overshoot' that was part of the Challenger disaster
SO eg ramping up to 1 ton load applied to a flexible structure can produce more stress than a steady 1 ton applied
(but ramping up to 1 ton load applied to a rigid structure can't produce more stress than a steady 1 ton applied)
aircraft designers eg Boeing allowed 50% extra for this effect of unsteady loading (said a letter in Av&Space Weekly)

modern load measurement uses point stress (strain) for its signal - the load sensors being notionally rigid
the point strain is typically only 50 parts per million or less - and the strain elsewhere less than 5 ppm
this rigidity is unimportant eg when weighing a piece of steak .... but is crucial elsewhere .....
eg force measurement in aerodynamic or hydrodynamic model tests requires such (quasi-rigidity)

in 20 years of designing such equipment I recall one case of customer checks finding insufficient rigidity 'in the system'
this was traced to (another's work) mounting the system to Earth via concrete (this was insufficiently rigid)

look at NLR's big wind tunnel balances - and their mountings

peaty
peaty
10
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2014 5:56 pm

Re: Rear wing flex and FIA regulatory test 2021

Post

Stu wrote:
Wed Jun 09, 2021 7:58 am

Is it still part of the rules that in order to make an official protest, money has to be put down on the table?
Paying to make an official protest? protesting in accordance with the code? Does that even exist? Is it not done through the media?

P.S:Jokes aside...Altough it looks like things have change a bit lately (at least for "some"), in theory...yes (article 17? of the sporting code). Protest 2000 euros and appeals 6000 euros.

User avatar
Big Tea
155
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2017 7:57 pm

Re: Rear wing flex and FIA regulatory test 2021

Post

peaty wrote:
Sat Jun 12, 2021 12:25 pm
Stu wrote:
Wed Jun 09, 2021 7:58 am

Is it still part of the rules that in order to make an official protest, money has to be put down on the table?
Paying to make an official protest? protesting in accordance with the code? Does that even exist? Is it not done through the media?

P.S:Jokes aside...Altough it looks like things have change a bit lately (at least for "some"), in theory...yes (article 17? of the sporting code). Protest 2000 euros and appeals 6000 euros.
Note to team finance office. Do not allow cost cap to prevent appeal. ( 6K in an envelope in the draw maybe )
We are standing on the shoulders of Giants. So don't kick.

Sevach
Sevach
936
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 4:00 pm

Re: Rear wing flex and FIA regulatory test 2021

Post

Wouter wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 7:30 pm
dans79 wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 4:52 pm
Wouter wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 4:30 pm
I got my information from Horner who said that Max raced with a medium/high DF wing and Perez with almost the same wing.

Where did you get the information from that "red bull ran their usual lower wing setup that they always run."?
.
First and foremost you can just look at the wing and see it's not a high DF wing. Look at the end plates/uprights compared to Monaco. Look at the shape and layout of the baku wing compared to Monaco.
https://cdn-1.motorsport.com/images/amp ... ar-win.jpg

The first wing up here called Baku wing wasn't the wing Max used during the race.
This wing was only tested during FP1. Photo from FP1 :

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E2-EpVOXwAM ... name=small

Here is the race wing:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E2-AcBwWYAQ ... name=large

I think you will find that Horner meant the wing they ran was "medium/high DF" for this specific circuit, not overall.
I was talking about this circuit, Baku, not about overall.
Red Bull also added a gurney flap to this wing model.

I'm also thinking both teams largely converged, Mercedes flexing a little more, Red Bull a little less (than before), Red Bull still pushing the boundaries a bit more.

User avatar
El Scorchio
43
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2019 11:41 am

Re: Rear wing flex and FIA regulatory test 2021

Post

Sevach wrote:
Sat Jun 12, 2021 2:02 pm
Wouter wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 7:30 pm
dans79 wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 4:52 pm

.
First and foremost you can just look at the wing and see it's not a high DF wing. Look at the end plates/uprights compared to Monaco. Look at the shape and layout of the baku wing compared to Monaco.
https://cdn-1.motorsport.com/images/amp ... ar-win.jpg

The first wing up here called Baku wing wasn't the wing Max used during the race.
This wing was only tested during FP1. Photo from FP1 :

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E2-EpVOXwAM ... name=small

Here is the race wing:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E2-AcBwWYAQ ... name=large

I think you will find that Horner meant the wing they ran was "medium/high DF" for this specific circuit, not overall.
I was talking about this circuit, Baku, not about overall.
Red Bull also added a gurney flap to this wing model.

I'm also thinking both teams largely converged, Mercedes flexing a little more, Red Bull a little less (than before), Red Bull still pushing the boundaries a bit more.
I think so too. MB Probably they knew a protest wouldn’t be successful and probably had more flexible wings in the stock room, so to speak and just thought for this weekend if you can’t beat them, join them. RB probably knew the same but played it a bit safer just in case.

Pretty glad it passed without any real controversy. France could still be interesting though.

User avatar
El Scorchio
43
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2019 11:41 am

Re: Rear wing flex and FIA regulatory test 2021

Post

peaty wrote:
Sat Jun 12, 2021 12:25 pm
Stu wrote:
Wed Jun 09, 2021 7:58 am

Is it still part of the rules that in order to make an official protest, money has to be put down on the table?
Paying to make an official protest? protesting in accordance with the code? Does that even exist? Is it not done through the media?

P.S:Jokes aside...Altough it looks like things have change a bit lately (at least for "some"), in theory...yes (article 17? of the sporting code). Protest 2000 euros and appeals 6000 euros.
So funny that it’s such a nominal amount with all the money in the sport. Probably the equivalent of buying a chocolate bar for most of us so it’s hardly an amount that’s going to make teams really carefully consider whether to appeal or not.