Flexible wings 2011

[Tozza Mazza]

a young's modulus of 290Gpa, which is very very very very strong.

Modulus of elasticity, so you are talking of stiffness not strength. 290 sounds a bit high. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young%27s_modulus

Anyway steel is 200, so your modulus for CF is only 50% higher. It is not as if CF is 10 times the stiffness.

Also, the above is only relevant to linear behaviour

Thanks, my teachers a very intelligent guy, but as a teacher, how shall i put this, his methods are a bit out of date, and we only did it a couple of days ago. I am certain it was either 270Gpa or 290Gpa, which is very stiff (not neccesarily strong, although it is aswell).

...
The thing that confuses me about all this, is a front wing is made of Carbon Fibre, which is one of the strongest materials on the planet. In physics the other day, my teacher said that it has a young's modulus of 290Gpa, which is very very very very strong.

The point is that we are talking about an anisotropic structure, it does not have the same properties in every direction, which is why a torsion can result in a vertical movement. In the case of RBR, downwards.

Thanks, just learnt a new word, and thanks. Is the carbon Fibre solid or hollow in a wing? If solid it could be woven in a way to change its strenth at different points to allow flex.

[ianwit]

Ted Kravitz on radio5 live covering 1st quali said that it was the new McLaren front wing for Turkey that failed it's own tests before Turkey which simulate the FIA front wing test. Whether it broke or flexed too much he didn't say.

[strad]

After Vettel crashed in practice for Turkey, keen eyes saw wires coming out of the pylons...Matchette has his ideas...What are yours?
click photo

[ianwit]

That picture was displayed a few pages back along with a discussion.

[andrew]

you're about 2 weeks too late with that.

The most reasonable explanation is they are wires for some sort of sensor.

[marekk]

Hence my suggestion that they side step the whole issue with an FIA supplied spar inside the wing, just like there is an FIA ECU and an FIA plank to control ride height. The alternative is go in an endless merry-go-round of irrelevant tests.

One spar could be not enough, pivoting still possible.
Even the whole wing supplied by FIA could be not enough to stop this - what about elastic (telescopic) pillars ? Elastic nosecone ?

I totally agree with richard - real tests could be only done in wind tunel, and one need certified tunel big enough to accomodate the whole car (with moving belt) at every race track, to have some decent, repeatable results.

Other then that, it's just like trying to do some static load testing to this wing:



and to believe we can understand/aproximate device's behavior under aero load

[strad]

you're about 2 weeks too late with that.

sorry...didn't see it.

[gridwalker]

Testing the whole car is unfeasible due to logistics, but I see no reason why the whole nosecone can't be tested. It should be relatively easy to set up an air tunnel test rig for the nosecone; then all you need to do is standardise the mounting points for the nosecone so they fit the rig.

Any car in the points must supply their nosecone for testing upon request. This may happen randomly or as the result of a protest.

Although you wouldn't be able to simulate the exact same airflow as the original car, you could approximate it accurately enough to make circumventing the regulations much more difficult. It would massively increase the complexity of the engineering required to get the desired effect, making it more cost effective to focus on other areas of development.

I think that would be problem solved.

[marekk]

Testing the whole car is unfeasible due to logistics, but I see no reason why the whole nosecone can't be tested. It should be relatively easy to set up an air tunnel test rig for the nosecone; then all you need to do is standardise the mounting points for the nosecone so they fit the rig.

Any car in the points must supply their nosecone for testing upon request. This may happen randomly or as the result of a protest.

Although you wouldn't be able to simulate the exact same airflow as the original car, you could approximate it accurately enough to make circumventing the regulations much more difficult. It would massively increase the complexity of the engineering required to get the desired effect, making it more cost effective to focus on other areas of development.

I think that would be problem solved.

1. You need wind tunel for full scale model. Not that easy to set up IMO.
2. If you test without the car and rotating wheels, it's possible to have wing/nosecone pass FIA wind tunel test and still flex in real world (front tyre downwash alone is strong enough to make this happen).
3. Teams don't have full scale wind tunels, they are not even allowed to do full scale test, not to mention max speed allowed is 50 m/s. Virgin don't have wind tunel at all. How can they proof if their new front wing is compliant with the rules ?

[hecti]

http://axisofoversteer.blogspot.com/201 ... lysis.html
sweet slow mo from spain
yes redbull is touching the ground, but i think that its materials research team are amazing at what they do to have this much flex and still pass the tests, props to them! =D>

[hollus]

The Bull's front wing touching the ground in that video has little to do with wing flex. Stop the video at 0:05 or 0:07 and check the obscene amount of rack in the floor. The rear end of the car just lifted up at those points, probably some braking going on, while the tea tray is also scraping the ground.
Also, while the left end plate touches the ground, the right end plate is well clear of it. There is just a lot of diving and body roll in that sequence.

[strad]

What that video shows is how badly the car porpoises over bumps,,,IMO

[Caito]

Charlie Whiting said the following:


Your thoughts on the legality of current front wings
The flexibility limits are clearly stated. It’s very simple. Under the test load [wings] are allowed to move 20mm.
The only thing we could discuss in the Technical Working Group is whether those limits are too high – but everyone has the same limits, they’re all tested in the same way.
There was often an argument that the cars see more load on the wings, on the track, than they do under our test. But we often double that load to make sure that the deflection remains the same up to the increased load. We test everyone like that. We test with the nose off the car, on the car. We think we have been very thorough. The teams, I think, are satisfied. I haven’t heard any complaints of late. I think the situation is under control.

[marcush.]

.....and the sun shines....dear me what a naive person how could he survive in that shark pool maybe by being half blind if needed?

[xpensive]

.....and the sun shines....dear me what a naive person how could he survive in that shark pool maybe by being half blind if needed?

Well marcush, you know my sentiments on his qualifications, he's a former mechanic and nothing wrong with that,
but perhaps not the most ideal background for this position? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Whiting

To appoint him to FIA Formula One Race director was clearly a machiavellian move by MrM if you ask me.