RB6 asymmetric flexing after Hungary cause of crash?

[zen_tm]

Some doubts are being cast on the safety of the flexing wings of the RBR in some quarters, which suggest that perhaps the flex characteristics influenced Vettel's crash into Button...

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2010/09/a ... it-button/

http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_ ... t_id=41884

The FOM are pulling the vids down, but you can see for yourself with the following GIF and full youtube vid [unlisted link - please don't repost]

http://i.imgur.com/7mV1s.gif [gif]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lq7-ORCWLYg [youtube vid]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lq7-ORCWLYg#t=0m52s [deep link to onboard]

It would be interesting to hear some of your thoughts on the matter... Is the RBR design team/Newey endangering lives with his extreme design philosophy? Personally I think not, but if it's a contributing factor to some of the crashes we have seen, and they know of it, I believe they have a moral obligation to mitigate it's impact...

[Pierre6]

The ".gif" works, the youtube's are down.

You can see the wing flexing alright,... If it's the cause for the crash,... that's another question IMO.

[wesley123]

it is really simple to explain, the car is running in a wake, air that is not 'optimal', this wake is turbulent causing different flow fields, causing the wing to move weird. Then he moves out of the slipstream with the left front wing, so that part has clean air, causing its flex and possible also a little front balance to the left. This i believe cannot cause the crash, the balance is only upset at the front, which should cause in different turn in.

What imo is plausible, is that due to the flex wing the underbody gets choked, thus when he ran partly out of the slipstream the right underbody was choked, Vettel notices that, but as he moves out of the slipstream the right side returns its downforce causing an mistake by Vettel because he has minded an small balance to the left, then you get an sudden balance to the right wich caused the instability.

[WhiteBlue]

Red Bull argued in the Silverstone wing controversy that the new for Silverstone wing was aiding aggressive turn in. This seems to be confirmed by the clearly perceptable roll of the front wing vs the body during the maneuver.

[mep]

These crashes have nothing to do with the car.
They are driver mistakes, there is nothing wrong with the car.

[aral]

These crashes have nothing to do with the car.
They are driver mistakes, there is nothing wrong with the car.

I take it that you are an employee of Red Bull, and have all the electronic data?

Otherwise, how on earth can you make such an assertive comment?

[marcush.]

I have to admit that I share meps opinion .of course we see the flex but that does not
say much of how much difference there is in terms of downforce towards a non flexiwing car.I´m under the impression that just because the flexithings are envogue it is awelcome explanation for wonderboys falling from grace.
Fact is both RB drivers have struggled to impress in traffic situations this year ,one may ask if this was the case in the years before as well?

To me Seb simply was too late with his actions and had to somewhere hit the brake during his weave to make the corner....or he ´d end in the runoff....he denied himself the escape road on principle....and that triggered the coming together.

Of course we do not havve the data .. but counting back those 1.5 sec from the hit when Button satred to brake..it seems logic that SEB needed to place himself to the side of Button AND Brake at the same time...a close cut ..if you ask me.

[Richard]

mep - It is worth wondering if the way the front wing dramatically gallops influences the car handling.

If the downforce is amplified as the wing lowers to the ground, then the oscillation of the wing will switch the downforce on and off. I can see that a stiff wing might give a progressive build of downforce.

I guess I'm asking if the moving RB wing results in similar on/off nature to the ground effect floors.

I agree it doesn't excuse the driver, but it might not make it easy for him either.

[marcush.]

mep - It is worth wondering if the way the front wing dramatically gallops influences the car handling.

If the downforce is amplified as the wing lowers to the ground, then the oscillation of the wing will switch the downforce on and off. I can see that a stiff wing might give a progressive build of downforce.

I guess I'm asking if the moving RB wing results in similar on/off nature to the ground effect floors.

I agree it doesn't excuse the driver, but it might not make it easy for him either.

I digress here Richard.the wing does not switch off when not run close to the ground ...its the downforce that bends it down and adds a portion of extra downforce.So the difference we have is simply that running in the wake will robb you a lot of downforce for stiff and bendy wings but there might be a bigger total fluctuation ,a hevy vibration PLUS a modifiction of flow fields further back on the car due to the front wing asuming position not optimised to the car at that speed.

so the downforce going vs zero is for both stiff and bendy wing a fact when crossing the wake of the car in front.
thats how I see it.

[aral]

mep - It is worth wondering if the way the front wing dramatically gallops influences the car handling.

If the downforce is amplified as the wing lowers to the ground, then the oscillation of the wing will switch the downforce on and off. I can see that a stiff wing might give a progressive build of downforce.

I guess I'm asking if the moving RB wing results in similar on/off nature to the ground effect floors.

I agree it doesn't excuse the driver, but it might not make it easy for him either.

I digress here Richard.the wing does not switch off when not run close to the ground ...its the downforce that bends it down and adds a portion of extra downforce.So the difference we have is simply that running in the wake will robb you a lot of downforce for stiff and bendy wings but there might be a bigger total fluctuation ,a hevy vibration PLUS a modifiction of flow fields further back on the car due to the front wing asuming position not optimised to the car at that speed.

so the downforce going vs zero is for both stiff and bendy wing a fact when crossing the wake of the car in front.
thats how I see it.

It is not just downforce that can pull the wing down. There is also a lowering of pressure between the bottom of the wing and the ground, sucking the wing even further down. When a car is running close to another car, the exhaust blown diffuser is blasting out air at a great rate, and is also causing turbulence. This could cause flutter in the following cars wing, fluctuating the grip from the front tyres. Red Bull are seriously considering thatr this was the cause of the accident.

[mep]

Vettel simply changed direction to fast and aggressive and therefore lost control of the car. This can happen with every car even with your street car this can cause a crash.

In Turkey he slightly crossed the line of Webber and he didn't move away causing the cars to touch.

In Valencia Webber crashed into the back of another car because he had a massive speed overrun.

On none of these crashes you can notice any effect of reduced downforce. Well downforce doesn't even play a role when you crash into the back of a leading car or cuts someone else’s line. On the other side we have not noticed any special troubles of the RedBulls following other cars trough corners. Well every current F1 car has them RB is not special there.

by gilgen
It is not just downforce that can pull the wing down. There is also a lowering of pressure between the bottom of the wing and the ground, sucking the wing even further down

That actualy is called downforce.
There is nothing else.

[Richard]

by gilgen
It is not just downforce that can pull the wing down. There is also a lowering of pressure between the bottom of the wing and the ground, sucking the wing even further down

That actualy is called downforce.
There is nothing else.

I think this refers to the load on the wing in free space, plus the ground effect. Both contribute to down force