2010 F1 Belgian Grand Prix

[Ardius]

The FIA tests allow for a linear amount of flex in the wing though, this is the point.

This is the FIA regulation for all interested:
3.17.1 Bodywork may deflect no more than 10mm vertically when a 500N load is applied vertically to it 800mm forward of the front wheel centre line and 795mm from the car centre line. The load will be applied in a downward direction using a 50mm diameter ram and an adapter 300mm long and 150mm wide. Teams must supply the latter when such a test is deemed necessary.

 

[Famine]

How are you drawing the conclusion that the relative amount of flex is linear?

That says no more than 10mm of flex under the specified 50kg mass. What does the current test say about how much flex is allowed for a 100kg mass?

What if it flexes less than the maximum allowed for either, but the relationship is non-linear (say the amount permitted is 10mm@50kg and 20mm@100kg [linear], but the amount displayed is 2mm@50kg and 19mm@100kg [non-linear])?

 

[Alex.]

I see they have further neutered Spa by replacing the les combes grass with tarmac. However the tarmac has supposed bumps, so if someone goes off there hopefully should be a price to pay. If they carry on with the run-off areas they might as well just stage the race on foot in a giant bouncy castle.

 

[Ardius]

How are you drawing the conclusion that the relative amount of flex is linear?

Because I have been reading the relevant articles:

The FIA is allowed to change the test as it sees fit thanks to a rule which says: “In order to ensure that the requirements of Article 3.15 are respected, the FIA reserves the right to introduce further load/deflection tests on any part of the bodywork which appears to be (or is suspected of), moving whilst the car is in motion.”

Current rules allow the tips of the wing to flex by 10mm when a load of 50kg, which is 500 Newtons, is applied to them. But rival teams estimate that Red Bull’s wing is flexing by up to 25mm at high speed and on board TV footage at the weekend in Budapest clearly showed the wing rising up at the end of the straight when the driver braked.

The FIA has indicated that it is likely to double up the test load, with up to 100 kilogrammes onto the wing – and it will only allow a linear increase of deflection up to 20mm, which would appear to rule out the current Red Bull wing.

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2010/08/why-new-fia-flexi-test-wont-clip-red-bulls-wings/

The test itself is linear not the wing necessarily. I possibly worded that last post badly, but still, if the wing did reach the maximum deflection in both tests, then its deflection is linear to the load. Of course it could be in between and non-linear, I'm not sure the FIA care if the wing flexes less or slightly more as long as its within the maximum.
It really depends what the FIA are trying to find.

 

[Famine]

The test itself is linear not the wing necessarily. I possibly worded that last post badly, but still, if the wing did reach the maximum deflection in both tests, then its deflection is linear to the load.

Yes - what you said was that the FIA allowed flex with a linear relationship to load. The reality is that their test assumes a maximum permitted flex which has a linear relationship with the test loads - the wing could have zero flex with either load and 25mm at 180mph and be legal.

Allen's article confirms what I've been saying that, at high-speeds where an F1 car's downforce profile is anywhere from 2:1 to 4:1 (downforce:rest weight), the wing deflects more than the permitted rest maximum with a much lighter load than would be exerted upon it at that speed. With a 100kg mass in one place on it I doubt it'll come close to the 25mm it experiences at 180mph with the equivalent of three-quarters of a tonne across it...

 

[Bram Turismo]

Hang on chaps. Didn't the FIA declare the Red Bull front wing as legal several weeks ago just after the German Grand Prix?

 

[BlacqueJacques]

Go Mark!

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

Hang on chaps. Didn't the FIA declare the Red Bull front wing as legal several weeks ago just after the German Grand Prix?

They did. In the spirit of consistency they also introduced stricter tests.

 

[Bram Turismo]

They did. In the spirit of consistency they also introduced stricter tests.

So there is a possibility their wings can still be declared illegal if they flex more than the new rules on these wings, correct?

 

[MagpieRacer]

I would love to see Button win here, I also want Sutil to do well but I think its gonna be a Red Bull whitewash as long as it stays dry.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

So there is a possibility their wings can still be declared illegal if they flex more than the new rules on these wings, correct?

Yes

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Hang on chaps. Didn't the FIA declare the Red Bull front wing as legal several weeks ago just after the German Grand Prix?

Yes, they did - but the teams requested they be tested again during the Hungarian Grand Prix, and footage emerged showing the Red Bull RB6 and Ferrari F10 running with a front wing that was incredibly close to the ground when compared to everyone else.

 

[Seismica]

How are you drawing the conclusion that the relative amount of flex is linear?

That says no more than 10mm of flex under the specified 50kg mass. What does the current test say about how much flex is allowed for a 100kg mass?

What if it flexes less than the maximum allowed for either, but the relationship is non-linear (say the amount permitted is 10mm@50kg and 20mm@100kg [linear], but the amount displayed is 2mm@50kg and 19mm@100kg [non-linear])?

That is an interesting point. A wing can be clearly non-linear in the amount of flex with a linear increase in force applied to it.

But the FIA regulations only account for the maximum flex being linear. Nowhere does is state the actual flex has to be linear. I think it's a loophole that Red Bull may have exploited. The FIA tests should involved 2 seperate amounts, only allowing for a linear increase in the actual (Not maximum - though there should be a maximum) amount of flex.

But again, it has to be a greater load spread out across the front wing, not a small amount concentrated on one point. In theory the FIA tests are applying more force to that small area than would be applied at high speed. But that isn't a comprehensive test. Force needs to be applied to all parts of the wing at the same time, equal to the amount of force they would be put under at 200mph (And for the sake of measuring the linearity, the force at a lower speed too, say 120mph - To compare the two results).

If Red Bull got around the 50kg test, they will get around the 100kg test.

 

[Peter]

Remember, Red Bull aren't exactly great at top speed, and that's really what's important at Spa. The best bet this weekend is McLaren, and Ferrari, and who knows, Force India has been up top in the speedtraps all year, maybe they can bring home some nice points.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

If Red Bull got around the 50kg test, they will get around the 100kg test.

If Red Bull are to be believed, they're not "getting around" anything. Their claim is that their wings don't flex at all, and the direct, unspoken implication of that is that their wings are running closer to the ground because of something else entirely. Sebastian Vettel has said that the secret of the RB6's success is well-kept, and McLaren have said they're trying to copy the design but have absolutely no idea what they're looking for. Earlier in the year there was the suggestion that they were running some kind of automatically-adjustable suspension system designed to keep the car at the optimal ride height setting based on its fuel load, but that idea was shot down. It wouldn't surprise me if the same thing has happened once again, with everyone guessing incorrectly as to the source of Red Bull's power.

Don't forget, however, that Red Bull aren't the only team who are under scruitny. All of the teams will be subject to the increased load tests, and Ferrari are also being targeted. If Red Bull's secret is as well hidden as they claim it to be, it wouldn't come as a shock if Ferrari have run conditionally-flexing wings in an attempt to replicate the RB6. Red Bull will guard their secret with their lives; it's unlikely that Ferrari would have been able to figure it out and copy it in the fortnight between the German and Hungarian Grands Prix.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

Their claim is that their wings don't flex at all.

They can say whatever they want, but I have seen their wings flex. It's like Ferrari saying there were no team orders in Germany. They just know how to make the wings pass the tests, but be effective during race conditions. Seeing as the test and race conditions are pretty different, it's not that hard to believe.

 

[Louie_Schumii]

If Red Bull are to be believed, they're not "getting around" anything. Their claim is that their wings don't flex at all, and the direct, unspoken implication of that is that their wings are running closer to the ground because of something else entirely.....

Didn't Vettel's whole front wing/nose cone assembly suffer a failure in Silverstone practise this year? This could be a clue that it's not the wing itself that's flexing (or doing some sort of rule breaking) so if the other teams were looking for something illegal they might be looking in the wrong place / doing the wrong test.

The overall downforce on an F1 car is equivalent to 550kg at just 120mph - closing on 3 times that at 200mph. If only 100kg of it was on the front wing, that'd be 1.5 tonnes on the rear wing and ancillary winglets - or 15:1 rear:front bias.

...

The reality is likely to be far nearer a 1:1 distribution of downforce loading over the car at speed - meaning that at just 120mph, the front wing will be creating and experiencing forces equivalent to more than 250kg placed on it at rest.

Doesn't 2/3's of an F1 cars downforce come from the diffuser and the remaining 1/3 come from the wings, ancillary winglets, etc.?

 

[Alex.]

The RB6 has flexible aero that doesn't include the front wing, many cars do. It's this along with the superior blown diffuser, renault engine mode of idle exhaust gases, ULTRA low centre of gravity, pullrod rear suspension, F-duct, and 2 fantastic drivers that puts this car on the front row every race. I believe they also have a flexible floor.


Mercedes, Ferrari and Mclaren are all working together behind the scenes to work out the tricks RBR have. I think it's a combination of a near perfect design and the tricks other teams also have, but more refined versions. Ferrari aren't far away because to design their car they basically took some tracing paper over the RB5 at the end of last season and got to work. I don't think there is a 'secret' to the Red Bull's pace.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

They can say whatever they want, but I have seen their wings flex.

What's the definition of flexing? If flexing is defined as a part moving when placed under aerodynamic load and Red Bull are not using aerodynamics to cause the wing to flex, then they've found a loophole to slip through.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

What's the definition of flexing? If flexing is defined as a part moving when placed under aerodynamic load and Red Bull are not using aerodynamics to cause the wing to flex, then they've found a loophole to slip through.

So where's this definition of flexing? I wasn't aware aerodynamics were a part of the definition.

 

[tibiquera]

Wasn't McLaren last year rubbish on Spa, with massive problems on fast speed corners? I'm beginning to think this race will actually suit Red Bull well, because they have amazing stability on high speed corners.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

So where's this definition of flexing? I wasn't aware aerodynamics were a part of the definition.

I'd say it would be in the rulebook. The reason why I'm asking is because I'm curious as to how the FIA defines flexing - I don't know if it has to do with aerodynamics or not. If the rules say that flexing comes about as a result of the prssures exerted by downforce and Red Bull have found a way to make the wings flex that does not require downforce to operate, then they've found a loophole to slip through. However, I have no idea how you'd be able to make wings that a) can flex without the need of downforce and b) you can prove as much.

Wasn't McLaren last year rubbish on Spa, with massive problems on fast speed corners? I'm beginning to think this race will actually suit Red Bull well, because they have amazing stability on high speed corners.

Yes, and it's been an entire year since then. The MP4/25 is a much better car than its predecessor.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

If the rules say that flexing comes about as a result of the prssures exerted by downforce and Red Bull have found a way to make the wings flex that does not require downforce to operate, then they've found a loophole to slip through.

Flexing is flexing; there is no requirement for downforce. Even if it could flex without downforce, it would be a moveable aerodynamic device.

 

[Seismica]

I think both Force India and Sauber are in contention for good points, maybe even a podium. The Sauber has proven it's stability in the high speed corners at circuits like Silverstone and the Ferrari engine isn't too far behind the benchmark Mercedes in terms of power.

The different sectors suit different teams. The weakness of the Mclaren is long/high speed bends, the weakness of the Red Bull is the straights. The Ferrari seems to be a jack of all trades, master of none, but it has better straightline speed than the Red Bull (Although whether it has the aerodynamic efficiency to be effective in all sectors, we have yet to see).

The straightline speed advantage of the Mclaren that the drivers enjoyed earlier in the season is all but gone. Their competitors have F-ducts now too. They may be able to capitalize on the more powerful Mercedes Engine, but they're going to have to run fairly high downforce in qualifying to match the Red Bulls and Ferraris in sector 2.

The Mercedes of Rosberg won't even make Q3 (And Schumi will start from the back of the grid no doubt).

I'm going to say, Webber and Button first and second on the podium, with Kobayashi in there somewhere too. Sutil 4th.

 

[Famine]

Doesn't 2/3's of an F1 cars downforce come from the diffuser and the remaining 1/3 come from the wings, ancillary winglets, etc.?

No.

Most of what keeps an F1 car on the ground is on the car's upper surfaces - watch what happens when a car loses its nose or rear wing.

The diffuser has a significant effect - more significant in some cars than others - but it's not the most important aero part on the car in terms of the overall downforce package. Remember, this is F1, where a 1% advantage is enough to turn a mid-pack car into a champion. That's not to say there aren't cars where the diffuser is a vital piece in an aero package - designed to work with all the other wings and ducts to polish the package off - but it's not the largest single generator of vertical force.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/86109

It may not be flexing wings after all - rather, speculation is that Red Bull and Ferrari have flexible floors, which bend to lower the wing closer to the roadway.

 

[Pupik]

I'm not suspicious of Red Bull until I see a fan propeller sticking out of the back of the car.

 

[livemusic]

FIA is suspect of having flexible rules.

 

[damez]

 

[orimarc]

I don't get i-

Oh wait... Spa, F1...