Flexiwings 2024

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
User avatar
Vanja #66
1538
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 3:38 pm

Re: Flexiwings 2024

Post

hollus wrote:
Sun Sep 22, 2024 10:06 am
Is this way off?
Sadly, I'm a but too busy to read your full analysis atm :( However, rear wing numbers look a bit inflated, drag at 300kmh would probably be no more than 100kg and weight alone would be 10-15kg. If you redo this analysis with those numbers you might take different conclusions, hope this helps!
And they call it a stall. A STALL!

#DwarvesAreNaturalSprinters
#BlessYouLaddie

User avatar
organic
1049
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2022 1:24 am
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: Flexiwings 2024

Post

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/mark ... periority/

The race giving credit where it's due. A lot of McLaren's current advantage comes from the excellent characteristics of the flexible front wing that allows McLaren to retain great balance even with higher DF levels. Something that other teams lose

Sevach
Sevach
1077
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 4:00 pm

Re: Flexiwings 2024

Post

It would be nice to have a Mclaren, Ferrari, Red Bull and Merc nose cam from Singapore just to see where everybody stands currently.

User avatar
organic
1049
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2022 1:24 am
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: Flexiwings 2024

Post

Sevach wrote:
Mon Sep 23, 2024 12:39 am
It would be nice to have a Mclaren, Ferrari, Red Bull and Merc nose cam from Singapore just to see where everybody stands currently.
Even then the nose cams don't show all the way outboard which is where I believe some of the trickery lies

Sevach
Sevach
1077
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 4:00 pm

Re: Flexiwings 2024

Post

That's true.

leblanc
leblanc
0
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2024 2:46 am
Location: Chicago

Re: Flexiwings 2024

Post

Farnborough wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2024 4:00 pm
leblanc wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2024 3:46 pm
Farnborough wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2024 3:35 pm
It surprises me that no one .... the great Internet, journalist scource, contributors on here ... all, none have come up with exactly what rule is being breeched in this wing case.
TD34
Are you going to quote it and give reason as to it's ability to give overarching control of measurement in this case ?
Do your own work.

Slitch-nl
Slitch-nl
0
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2024 9:20 am

Re: Flexiwings 2024

Post

Why are flexy wings banned? Is it an unfair advantage for the big teams because they have the resources to design such a complex part? In theory it would be beneficial, lower drag means less full consumption

Sevach
Sevach
1077
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 4:00 pm

Re: Flexiwings 2024

Post



Video expanded to show high downforce wings behaving normally.

PapayaFan481
PapayaFan481
0
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2024 12:08 pm

Re: Flexiwings 2024

Post

Slitch-nl wrote:
Mon Sep 23, 2024 5:02 pm
Why are flexy wings banned? Is it an unfair advantage for the big teams because they have the resources to design such a complex part? In theory it would be beneficial, lower drag means less full consumption
As one of the commentators pointed out on Sky Sports, it might have been Ted but might not, in 18 months time we'll have movable aero for exactly that reason anyway 😂
If I come across as blunt, I apologise, it's my ASD. Sometimes, like an F1 car aqua-planing, it gets out of my control.

Emag
Emag
84
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2019 1:56 pm

Re: Ferrari SF-24

Post

Andi76 wrote:
Tue Sep 24, 2024 6:52 am
Emag wrote:
Fri Sep 20, 2024 1:24 pm
venkyhere wrote:
Fri Sep 20, 2024 6:23 am
I believe the prime benefit of flexi front wings is not 'reduced drag'. Reduced drag in a straight line at high speed, is a secondary benefit that. The prime benefit, according to me is in high speed corners. The FW flexes, reduce the front downforce, shifts the center of pressure rearwards in the car "automatically" and introduces understeer. That's what the driver wants in a long radius high speed corner. In slower corners, no FW flex, high downforce in the nose => helps rotate the car faster. This 'dynamic balance change to suit different types of corners' is the real benefit of a flexi FW.
There is no scenario where any driver would want to induce understeer mid corner, except to counteract snap oversteer. Understeer is especially hurtful on a long radius corner that you take as an example here.

The benefit of flexing wings comes from the fact that you can run with a lot more load at the front, without a drag penalty which would otherwise nullify the advantages in (certain) corners with losses on the straights.
What you say is not quite true. Of course a driver doesn't like extreme understeer. But in fast corners, an understeering balance is definitely preferred, as is a slightly oversteering balance in slow corners. It is therefore quite correct that the main aim of the flexible wings is to "adjust" the aerodynamic balance accordingly. In slow corners you want more "front bite" and a little more downforce at the front, while in fast corners the aerodynamic balance should move slightly towards the rear. No driver wants a car that constantly threatens to break out at the rear at 300 km/h.
I highly doubt that a flexing wing could have that big of an effect on altering the entire car balance. If the flaps have been flexed backwards at the maximum of their capacity, the car is either on a straight, or going through a corner which is probably easily flatout on these cars for everyone. A while back I went to see exactly how much the wing was flexing on McLaren and Mercedes on the 100-250 kmh range where most corners would fall to, and the flex wasn’t nearly as dramatic as it appears when going from 320kmh+ on a straight down to <100kmh after a heavy braking zone.

Anyway, there was a missunderstanding with the comment I replied to, because if I recall the word “induce understeer” was used and that’s a terrible thing to have on a long radius high speed corner (china t12-13 and sochi t3). Ideally you want neither, but at those speeds you will get some understeer no matter what you do.

However, the fastest cars are almost always oversteery and the best drivers deal with it. It becomes more manageable as the downforce piles up for F1, a luxury which GT cars for example don’t have. Yet drivers still prefer that because it’s easier to induce rotation on low-medium speed corners under braking. In racing, that’s where most of the time is made/lost. If you take a high speed corner perfectly, you can maybe gain half a tenth, but if you take a medium speed corner perfectly you can easily gain 1-2 tenths.

It’s true that there have been successful drivers that have made understeery cars work too, but frankly I have no clue how they have done it.

User avatar
Vanja #66
1538
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 3:38 pm

Re: Flexiwings 2024

Post

Sevach wrote:
Mon Sep 23, 2024 7:35 pm
https://youtu.be/Oa3bVqfHE4s?si=g0apSwufkkLttfbf

Video expanded to show high downforce wings behaving normally.
Even if high-load wing flexed, it wouldn't bring nearly as much benefit as the low-load wing does. When a low drag wing flap drops 20mm down, it reduces frontal area significantly and also changes overall AoA significantly. The same reduction on high-load wing would yield significantly smaller benefit on both ends. Furthermore, the fact high-load configurations rarely exceed 300kmh without DRS also substantially reduces dynamic pressure compared to 330-340kmh in Monza, so I can't imagine they would be able to generate even 1kmh "benefit" with this amount of flexing

It was a very thought-out choice and design by McLaren to apply this specific amount of flexing on a wing that will benefit the most from it. If Ferrari had a comparable design with their Monza wing, they'd go nearly 340kmh on non-DRS straights in Monza
And they call it a stall. A STALL!

#DwarvesAreNaturalSprinters
#BlessYouLaddie

Andi76
Andi76
426
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2021 7:19 pm

Re: Ferrari SF-24

Post

Emag wrote:
Tue Sep 24, 2024 8:59 am
Andi76 wrote:
Tue Sep 24, 2024 6:52 am
Emag wrote:
Fri Sep 20, 2024 1:24 pm


There is no scenario where any driver would want to induce understeer mid corner, except to counteract snap oversteer. Understeer is especially hurtful on a long radius corner that you take as an example here.

The benefit of flexing wings comes from the fact that you can run with a lot more load at the front, without a drag penalty which would otherwise nullify the advantages in (certain) corners with losses on the straights.
What you say is not quite true. Of course a driver doesn't like extreme understeer. But in fast corners, an understeering balance is definitely preferred, as is a slightly oversteering balance in slow corners. It is therefore quite correct that the main aim of the flexible wings is to "adjust" the aerodynamic balance accordingly. In slow corners you want more "front bite" and a little more downforce at the front, while in fast corners the aerodynamic balance should move slightly towards the rear. No driver wants a car that constantly threatens to break out at the rear at 300 km/h.
I highly doubt that a flexing wing could have that big of an effect on altering the entire car balance. If the flaps have been flexed backwards at the maximum of their capacity, the car is either on a straight, or going through a corner which is probably easily flatout on these cars for everyone. A while back I went to see exactly how much the wing was flexing on McLaren and Mercedes on the 100-250 kmh range where most corners would fall to, and the flex wasn’t nearly as dramatic as it appears when going from 320kmh+ on a straight down to <100kmh after a heavy braking zone.

Anyway, there was a missunderstanding with the comment I replied to, because if I recall the word “induce understeer” was used and that’s a terrible thing to have on a long radius high speed corner (china t12-13 and sochi t3). Ideally you want neither, but at those speeds you will get some understeer no matter what you do.

However, the fastest cars are almost always oversteery and the best drivers deal with it. It becomes more manageable as the downforce piles up for F1, a luxury which GT cars for example don’t have. Yet drivers still prefer that because it’s easier to induce rotation on low-medium speed corners under braking. In racing, that’s where most of the time is made/lost. If you take a high speed corner perfectly, you can maybe gain half a tenth, but if you take a medium speed corner perfectly you can easily gain 1-2 tenths.

It’s true that there have been successful drivers that have made understeery cars work too, but frankly I have no clue how they have done it.
You can doubt it, but it is a fact it does. Front and rear wings are always an element to "trim" the aerodynamic balance. This is done by changing the angle of attack and thus the downforce generated. And nothing different happens when the wing bends backwards. The angle of attack becomes smaller, the downforce lower and, in the case of a front wing, you have less downforce at the front, which shifts the aerodynamic balance to the rear. It's actually a simple and logical thing. I don't have exact data on what today's wings bend, but in 2002 the front wing of the F2002 bent by seven centimeters. I must even have the exact data regarding x, y and z axis somewhere, unfortunately I couldn't find it quickly, but I'll try to post it later. Of course Ferrari in this era was the masters in this area (my greatest respect to this day Richard!), but even the worst teams reached 2cm and I think I heard that the McLaren wing today is supposed to bend in an area in between. So we are talking about several centimeters that the wing bends. This fact alone should make it clear that this has a significant effect on the aerodynamic balance of the car.

With regard to understeer and oversteer, there are some misunderstandings thanks to the press, because in fact there is hardly a driver who really wants an oversteering car in fast corners. Unfortunately, thanks to the media, a lot of things are often misunderstood here and everyone thinks Verstappen or Schumacher like or want a car that oversteers everywhere, even in the 130R at Suzuka. But that is not correct. Those top drivers who prefer oversteering cars want oversteering in tight, slow corners (which others can't handle at all, Berger was a prominent example) to steer the car in the right direction so that they can step on the throttle early. You can modulate the throttle to control the amount of oversteer on corner exit. But in corners like the 130R, the last thing a driver wants is to try to catch the rear of the car - oversteer - at over 300 mph. He'd rather have a bit of understeer, which is most easily accomplished with subtle steering and throttle adjustments.

Of course, we are talking about the most extreme differences in the speed spectrum here, but the same principles apply when the speed differences are not so extreme.

Of course, you can also look at the whole thing from the point of view of the radii of the curves, regardless of the speed, whereby the principle remains the same. In curves with a tight radius, it is particularly important that the car changes direction sufficiently. Slight oversteer helps here. In bends with a larger radius, the main thing is to keep the speed high. A drastic change of direction is NO longer necessary here. So an easier-to-handle driving behavior - understeer - is very helpful and even the top "oversteerers" don't want a car that oversteers in such corners.

So if you can tune the handling of the car so that it oversteers in slow corners and understeers in fast corners, that's actually always an advantage and it's easier when a car has aerodynamic downforce than when the car has no aerodynamics.

Drivers who made a so-called understeering car a success (Prost, Alonso) did it with their driving style, just like drivers at the other end (oversteer) did it. But this was mostly about Drivers who made a so-called understeering car a success (Prost, Alonso) did it with their driving style, just like drivers at the other end (oversteer) did it. It was mostly about the traction their cars offered. While Alonso's Renault had a weight distribution and drivetrain that offered an advantage in this respect, Prost actually tuned his car to have lots downforce in the rear. They used a lot of initial turn-in, which leads to understeer at corner entry, deliberately caused. They used an extreme slip angle to bring the car into the apex by shifting the front end. As a result, it brakes and turns in a little earlier. Another point was the tires, which "bit" faster as a result. Alonso then immediately reduced the steering angle and stepped on the gas. This meant he was on the gas much earlier than other car/driver combinations and had a hot tire for the apex and exit of the corner, where he could take full advantage of the Renault's superior traction. Prost achieved something similar through a special set-up.

Emag
Emag
84
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2019 1:56 pm

Re: Ferrari SF-24

Post

There is some slight pedantism here, because of course nobody would want a car that snaps on high speed corners and I don’t think I ever implied that.

However, that may come as a side-effect of having a car setup for more rotation (i.e oversteering) and it’s the balance between the corner types that is difficult to get right, both in driving and engineering.

As I previously mentioned, the point about understeer being bad was made as a response based on a missunderstanding on the words used. Inducing understeer on long radius high speed corners is almost never good.

You could ask all drivers on the grid and I doubt they would pick an overall understeery balance. Within this season alone you have plenty of examples (especially with drivers like Leclerc and Max) with complains about the car refusing to turn on certain corners.

And as a last point, which I did not want to bring up because I am fully aware it doesn’t apply anywhere near to the same extent as it applies on extreme race cars, having driven a (relatively) fast car around a track myself, plus countless of hours I have dumped on simracing, I would 100% of the time choose a car which is easier to turn when I want it to and deal with the occasional snap, rather than a car which is stable most of the time but it understeers everywhere.

That’s the last I wanted to say about this. It started about something that was somewhat related to the Ferrari car and it extrapolated into a general driving style and characteristics discussion.

taperoo2k
taperoo2k
14
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 4:33 pm

Re: Flexiwings 2024

Post

PapayaFan481 wrote:
Mon Sep 23, 2024 8:45 pm
Slitch-nl wrote:
Mon Sep 23, 2024 5:02 pm
Why are flexy wings banned? Is it an unfair advantage for the big teams because they have the resources to design such a complex part? In theory it would be beneficial, lower drag means less full consumption
As one of the commentators pointed out on Sky Sports, it might have been Ted but might not, in 18 months time we'll have movable aero for exactly that reason anyway 😂
McLaren getting to work early I guess. It'll be interesting to see where teams complain about wings breaking the rules in 2026 "It's moving 1mm too much!".

User avatar
ispano6
153
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 10:56 pm
Location: my playseat

Re: Flexiwings 2024

Post

The issue is between low speed understeer and high speed snap oversteer and losing and having to catch the rear and then never having full confidence to send it. The wind tunnel never recreates the conditions that causes a vehicle to experience snap oversteer but from simulation and driver feedback pointing toward balance that a front wing that loses down force in certain conditions may help to calm the rear. The lesson is walk back from pursuing peak down force if you can't balance it or use flexiwings to change the behavior or AoA for different corner types.