F1Photographer: @timallenphotoThnx.The critical part of the wing for the FIA(as I understand it)is under the nose.As long as it's secure the rest can flex.

And note that the outside right hand end of the wing droops more than the 'inside' elements.
That is not an artifact of camera movement, lighting, tyre pressure or the phase of the moon.
No question, that wing droops, clearly much more than the Merc or the McLaren.

It passes the 500 newton test.
But does it flex 'excessively'? (And by design?) {Both illegal}

I'd say it does, BECAUSE, seen in motion, it drops to a point where it seems not to droop significantly further. (And that's not when it hits the ground.)
Its stiff enough to pass the STANDARD test (but novel tests are allowed), however with increasing load it seems to go soft before, under heavy load {above something like 200 kph} stiffening to prevent problems like on the Ferrari F60's first day out at Mugello.


I do kinda wonder whether the scrutes might, even now, be preparing some new test methods for future races.
Hope so anyway.
An announcement to that effect would pre-empt this next 'arms race' and yes, yawn, reduce costs ...


AFAIK, the scrutes have declared that these wings are legal according to the standard test ONLY - and have said nothing at all about exercising their right to use novel tests to determine unacceptably flexible bodywork, floors and wings.

That is the crux of the matter. Variable aero isn't allowed however underload all aero devices will flex to some degree. The load tests were established to limit the amount of flex, yet clearly teams have engineered ways to circumvent these restristions.
If the wing was flexing up and down by 300mm the F.I.A would surely step in and deem the device illegal.

Absolutely.

Does anyone have a link to the actual wording that the FIA used ? (as opposed to the teams' press release wording!)

Was the verdict "legal" or "not found illegal" -- there's a VERY big difference!

There was no specific wording or testing, all the cars passed scrutineering as usual. There was a meeting between the FIA and the teams with photographs being shown and explained, but that had nothing to do with scrutineering and therefore produced no report

I suspect if Redbull were running a wing with cables attached to it in testing theres a pretty good chance they had the concept approved by the FIA.

I really don't believe that the FIA "declared it legal" (as was suggested upthread)- they just didn't find anything wrong.
And, just as with the Mass Damper, there's a possibility that the 'clarification' could come at any time.


It would be nice to see the wording of that statement!

I think it sounds like they just did the 500 newton ("50 kilo") test.
If they had done ANY 'unusual' testing, I'm sure we'd have heard about it.

This is another one that the regulations, unfortunately, leave open to a huge amount of interpretation.

On the one hand, the wings clearly pass that standard static deflection test.
On the other, a wing that is designed to flex under load when in motion is, by definition, a "movable aerodynamic device" which are prohibited.

The photographs show a front wing which is visibly flexing under load.

fine, don't believe me ... http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/f1_me...race-report.pdf

ferrari's floor was passing the tests in 2007, right?
but still got banned

That's because the rules say, in summary, that "flexible aero is not permitted, here is how we will test for flex, but we reserve the right to alter those tests if we think you're up to mischief."

They understand that all bodywork will flex under the loads that are applied, but seek to limit that with the tests. If the wing flexes non-linearly to a beneficial degree then at best the test needs to be redesigned. Paddy Lowe stated in his 2007 WMSC appearance that the suggestion a flexing item might be legal until the test is changed as 'extraordinary'. In his view it (the Ferrari floor) was always illegal, only not yet found to be so.

Thought it was the test that changed, not the floor being banned. That's still an option as the FIA can change the test at anytime. I imagine they just need to increase the test load if there is any doubt.

If the wings that are designed to flex in a non-linear manner, then the test weight would have to replicate (or at least approach) the forces in race conditions.
I don't think this is possible in a scrutineering bay.

Why not?

Sure you can, just increase the load (or maybe also change the placement of it)

If my, admittedly back of the envelope, calculations are correct, then the downward force applied on the wing at 300km/h would be well in excess of 3kg per square centimeter.
How would you test this without damaging the wing?

Hydraulic jack, pressing on a padded bag to spread the load. FIA could specify the region to be tested, and if it busted your wing(lets), tough ...

Designing the rig would be pretty simple, providing you know how to replicate aero loads. Its not just applying a force to a point or small area. Could be designed to test for deformation/deflection fore/aft, as well as vertically, depending on how much money you were prepared to spend, and how extensive you wanted the test to be. Presumably at least some of the works teams are doing physical tests, perhaps even testing some samples to destruction. Test could be done with a rig at a testing lab, tests on all wings, after the race if necessary, with a DQ if they failed as incentive to test before they are raced (and to make sure they do not fail ).

Cheapie, I think you have put your finger on the next big cheat to be identified . Re your post 196, have you ever watched a fish swim? I bet Renault have worked out a way of using this to make their cars go faster. Probably got some nano sized machanism in there to power it too ... and we thought Singapore 2008 was big ... I better go start a new 'cheat' thread ...

Interesting, so it seems to me that the FIA are currently targeting a scenario where the nose flexes down allowing the entire front wing to get closer to the ground. I believe the other thing they are looking for is the wings straightening out at speed.
So basically the teams have just found another clever way around the tests.

I'm not sure how the FIA came up with their testing figures but they do seem like awfully light loads. Probably a matter of applying the load without causing damage to the wing. The only way to test it at a realistic load would be in a wind tunnel I guess and thats probably a touch expensive. Of course just look at how they test the flex in aircraft wings. If they really wanted to test them they could have the teams put in a mounting point for weight at the end plates.


That last shot of the braced Red Bull front wing is very interesting. Quite alot of sideways shift there. I wonder if there is any advantage in that. I suppose it could be slightly shifting the flow over the outside of the car which would be presented to the air differently in a corner. I would have thought if the teams didn't want the wing to move sideways they could avoid it.

If the FIA's intention was to ban it, they would have done so on sunday.
It was declared legal, nobody officially protested, it's good to go.

It seems to me that everybody is still in the MadMax period, things are done different this year.

Yes, I think we are in agreement ... really!

Jo Bauer's statement (or bundle of statements) indeed was released after the race.
But the only mention of front wing 'deflection' testing is about testing after Quali - not after the race. Its at Page 10 among the list of things checked during scrutineering -
QUOTE "A front wing deflection test was carried on car numbers 01, 05 and 08. "
The statement ends QUOTE "All the above items were found to be in conformity with 2010 FIA Formula One Technical Regulations."

Seems they just did the prescribed 500 newton ("50 kilo") test on a McLaren, a Ferrari and a Red Bull.
On Saturday.





I don't see anything that says that the wings have been comprehensively examined and declared to not require any more detailed investigation.
Despite the Regs permitting other testing - none has been done, yet!

I think Whitmarsh's response means "If that's the only test you are going to do, then we'll build a droopy wing that nevertheless passes your silly little test!"

Not sure quite WHY the scrutes would want to avoid looking for something like the infamous Ferrari floor - designed to defeat the test and thus bypass the Regulation.

Perhaps the Whitmarsh comments are not so much a development announcement, but rather his way of stirring up the scrutes without issuing an official protest.
Interesting times!

I can just see MaClaren turning up in Spa with a new droopy wing just in time for FIA to announce they will be using a new test for the wings that will make them illegal, in the mean-time while MaClaren have spent all their time on the new wing RBR and Ferrari have been designing a new one that meets the new tests.

James Allen thinks he is exclusive, hehe, one day to late ...

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2010/07/phot...e-for-yourself/

If the wing is taking that kind of load anyway, why would a test which replicates it do damage and more than racing along a 1.5km straight?

The teams are required to provide rigs which allow the FIA to apply their mandated test, so it should be a simple matter for them to proscribe a test which took the wing closer to real limits.

Haha, I was just gonna post that...

AdamCooperF1's response... "adamcooperf1 @Jamesallenonf1 Those pics were all over the Autosport forums yesterday and have been well studied!"

Yet I think the MclAren also looks higher overall.

Renault's shark fins have done that for years. It's very odd as it can't be a performance enhancer.

Wow. McLaren should really hire smarter engineers? Some posters on F1 boards seem to understand those wings better than a friggin F1 team's engineers can. That's mind-boggling!

So much for McLaren's famed development skills... all flattered by the dog that was the MP4-24.

RBR and Ferrari's wings are much sleeker and thinner. McLaren should try to narrow its component a little bit and also try to simplify the upper level front plates of the FW. Ferrari and RBR have much cleaner, slimmer and efficient solutions.

It's Red Bull's and now Ferrari their flexi-wing which can generate alot of extra downforce in high speed corners. Normally this is illegal but it's done in a clever way that makes it legal.

Once Mclaren gets this flexiwing on their car, it's good-bye to Red Bull & Ferrari

I am just lost for words!

Making a wing that flexes is not a problem, teams were doing that (and having them banned) 10 years ago.
It is the degree of (presumably non-linear) flex and its effect of the airflow aft that is the issue.

There's a translated article on the F10 thread that states (translated) that Ferrari have a new gearbox design coming for spa, along with suspension geo changes. I can only presume that's to take further advantage of the EBD concept, apparently they've been at it for months. I'd heard other rumours about it, i think it's mark Hughes on BBC column says that the F10 is getting its rear aero completely overhauled for Belgium. Worries me somewhat.

I think Hungary will suit us better, there a few fast corners, in the last sector particularly. I reckon the RB's will be a step ahead, with us on Ferrari's level just about, at the very least dicing with Massa in quali. Mercedes and Kubica might get in there and bugger it all up though.

I can also see a protest on these flexi wings coming.

no, nobody on the boards understands how they work. its all conjecture and clearly forum posters haven't the resources to test thier theories where as mclaren do so they've probably tried all the ideas talked about on the forum and they won't work.

Andy who works within the engineering side of mclaren is a common visitor of the forum, so who's to say other engineers don't mull about them in thier spare time? so even if they had not thought up the idea of one of the board members its highly likely they will have seen it and thought about it.

The problem Mclaren has, is finding a way to do it in a legal way. They can do it ofcourse. But it's just some kind of clever trick Ferrari and Red Bull are doing. They'll find it later.

Suprised that this doesn't fall under moveable aerodynamic devices

Hungary = bumpy track?

Atleast that's what I think which makes it a hard track for Mclaren to win.

Nobody on the boards know how they work. Yes even you mkay don't understand.

And the rest, in the same way as they missed out on the f-duct.

All is far in love and war. And F1.

I dont think it will be too long before McLaren have optimised a solution to flex their front wing. It's all about balance and feel at the end of the day. More front downforce can be exploited, particularly by drivers like Hamilton, Barichello and Schumacher who like pointy front ends.

McLaren could have the best car in 3 races time if they optimise this. By then they would have everything on the Redbull in addition to an engine advantage in time for Monza.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/85618

it is worrying that, still they have no understanding about flexy wings

The common reference point is the nose/body. If you look at the nose and the sponsor logos on it you will see they are exactly in the same place in both shots. We see two things moving relative to the camera / body of the car:
1. the suspension and wheels move "up", which is really the downforce pressing the whole car down.
2. the ends of the front wing move down.

These shots show the wing tips flexing very clearly. Now as to whether it's legal or not, that's up to the FIA and the stewards

They just found out the concept is legal, otherwise flexy wings would have had little thought from McLaren. I expect they'll have one by Spa which is 4 weeks away giving them plenty of time to understand the concept.

i hope their scheduled development rate wont be affected with so much focusing on those new flexy wings and EBD issues

Ignore the suspension and concentrate on the difference in level relative to the top of the bodywork. The yellow line is steady on the logo and the wing moves relative to that point on the bodywork, which is what we are concerned with - the wheels move independently of either, they should not bend relative to the body/chassis unit.

And that they had designed them to flex, and were ascertaining by how much......

Although this could just be a subtle way of McLaren saying "we don't think this is legal" without actually saying as much, and adding some pressure to have the test process changed...

I can just see it now, hot news from MTC next week :

"For our next exciting installment we will be getting Jenson and Lewis designing and building a flexi-wing! Shooting to be on location at MTC during the next two weeks. As a special treat Jessica and Nicole will come along and demonstrate the Autoclave, John Button will be in the paint department and will show you how make white front wings pink. Anthony Hamilton will show how you how finances work and how to get fifteen percent by just standing around."

...somehow I dont think this is going to work...

..but then if Ferrari can s*it on the FIA and get away with it...

Agreed, relative to the nose-cone the wing is definitely deflecting in a downward trajectory. The suspension movement is irrelevant. Relavent to it's mounting point it is moving downwards.

One can only presume the wing is achieving more than 500kg of downforce

Do you think the entire Red Bull team (never mind Ferrari) is heading for the beach the coming 7 weeks?

Those december test pics of the Red Bull do make a lot of sense now.

My admiration for Adrian Newey grows by the day i must add. What a wizzard of aerodynamics.

On the contrary. McLaren undestand precisely what is going on. The flexing of the front wings is a minor issue. The significant issue is the use of splitters incorporating mechanisms that permit them to flex upwards under load. Thereby enabling the front wing to run at a much reduced ride height and the car overall at increased rake. The benefit is upwards of 0.5s per lap.

Obviously it isn't simple as this but why not make the outer ends of the wing heavier like put weights in the end plates or something to weigh themndown under load, or make the outer edges with a few less carbon sheets so it's not as strong?