Flexible wings controversy 2010

[gcdugas]

I have seen the photos of both Ferrari and Red Bull. I think they are running some sort of softer front suspension set up because even the center section of the wing is lower. I think they have some sort of device that causes the rotational energy of the caliper to transfer a load to the push rod causing the front not to bottom under braking. It could even be a closed hydraulic system all neatly incorporated into the caliper mount. All they need is for the front push rod to "grow" about 5mm and the ride height would be enough to prevent the wing from scraping under braking.

surely that would be active suspension

conni

No it would not.

[Richard]

It could even be a closed hydraulic system all neatly incorporated into the caliper mount.

I think hydraulic suspension is banned under the rules that require a "spring medium"

[tok-tokkie]

On motorcycles in the 80s they had a valve on the front fork damper linked to the front brake hydraulics. When you applied front brakes the valve closed locking the front forks damper so the front end did not dive. Problem was you had no front suspension when braking. I have simplified the explanation to the basis of the system.

[imightbewrong]

Very interesting interview with Aldo Costa (Ferrari) regarding the frontwing controversy:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/86175

Pretty much in line with the discussions here regarding rake and such.

[SiLo]

Just a snippet from "imightbewrong's" link:

Q. One of the issues from your rival teams is that they think you can only run the wing assembly as low as that, without the front of the floor hitting the ground, if the floor is flexing up or moving...

AC: Yes, but it is not. In my opinion, they are running, through their choice, not as stiff as we are running. They are not running as low as we are running. They are running much more horizontal with their set-up, more flat, so they have an aerodynamic characteristic of their car which is completely different. Or, they are bottoming much less – and they have a problem if they bottom in certain conditions.

Cleary he is referencing the rake of the cars here, which when looking at photos, is obvious the Ferrari and Red Bull are running more rake than Mclaren.

[marcush.]

Costa admitting their high downforce wing not within the regs in autosport interview....

For the wings we are using here at Spa, we have not made any modifications, because they are okay. The high downforce front wing we have will require some small adjustments though.
He also calims that for Monza all teams will have to introduce twin splitter mounts to comply with the floor test..so that could be a mayor issue for ReeBull
if they had a flexyfloor fitting point..

he´s bragging around about suspension stiffness and claiming Merc and Mercedes running their cars with less rake,wich is correct but at the same time
claiming they would run a stiffer setup than than Macs and Merc..hm I´m surprised
the behaviour of the car looks quite differnt.

For sure the less rake stiff rout is working only for McLaren in this season.Obviously Sauber have found a quantum leap in abandonning their low stiff approach in the rear and it seems rather obvious.

[marcush.]

so their nose has some added flex build in you are suggesting by this?

[Richard]

Costa also mentioned that the deflection measurements are changed. The deflection is now measured relative to the reference plane, it used to be measured relative to the nose.

Also that the downforce is 2.5 more than the 200kg test. So that confirms aero loads result in 500kg on each end of the wing, and 25mm total deflection.

[marcush.]

Costa also mentioned that the deflection measurements are changed. The deflection is now measured relative to the reference plane, it used to be measured relative to the nose.

Also that the downforce is 2.5 more than the 200kg test. So that confirms aero loads result in 500kg on each end of the wing, and 25mm total deflection.

right is giving away surprisingly much detail there...thanks a lot ALDO !

[xpensive]

@ richard & marcush;

10 kN of downforce from the front wing alone, I doubt that very much. The new FIA test is 1 kN on each end of the wing,
meaning that Aldo Costa's statement about real load being 2.5 times testing load, actually results in a total of 5 kN?

http://www.f1technical.net/news/15266

[fausto cedros]

Wings fallen, looks like someone is due to come back to earth...

[marcush.]

@ richard & marcush;

10 kN of downforce from the front wing alone, I doubt that very much. The new FIA test is 1 kN on each end of the wing,
meaning that Aldo Costa's statement about real load being 2.5 times testing load, actually results in a total of 5 kN?

http://www.f1technical.net/news/15266

yep ,of course..I was only commenting on Costa giving a lot of detailaway.,not the conclusions derived from it. 5kN is still a number.

[Richard]

@ richard & marcush;

10 kN of downforce from the front wing alone, I doubt that very much. The new FIA test is 1 kN on each end of the wing,
meaning that Aldo Costa's statement about real load being 2.5 times testing load, actually results in a total of 5 kN?

http://www.f1technical.net/news/15266

yep ,of course..I was only commenting on Costa giving a lot of detail away.,not the conclusions derived from it. 5kN is still a number.

Of course - 200kg for the tray, 100kg for the wing.

Hence aero loads according to the interveiw are 250kg on each side, so Costa infers a total wing deflection of 25mm if it is linear.

The key part is measuring deflection to the reference plane. You'd have thought that would be the easiest way anyway? Simply measure the gap to teh floor?

[marcush.]

the footage of Mclaren backwards facing nose camera giving a very good impression on splitter heights and front ride height changes...amazing coverage unfortunatelly just a few second on german telly..
but a clear indication just why RedBull cannot be happy having a camera in that position...

[aral]

the footage of Mclaren backwards facing nose camera giving a very good impression on splitter heights and front ride height changes...amazing coverage unfortunatelly just a few second on german telly..
but a clear indication just why RedBull cannot be happy having a camera in that position...

The camera angle is decided by the team, so Red Bull were totally happy to have the camera facing backwards. But was interesting in practice shots, was the total lack of suspension movement on the Red Bull,as opposed to the jiggly McLaren.