Home  
Site Partners: SpotterGuides Veloce Books  
Related Sites: Your Link Here  

Go Back   TenTenths Motorsport Forum > Single Seater Racing > Formula One

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 2 Aug 2010, 21:39 (Ref:2738429)   #26
pannenmann
Racer
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Germany
Bavaria
Posts: 188
pannenmann should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
These kind of tests seem rather primitive, I'm no engineer and not good at physics but even I know ways of building something that will flex in a non-linear way. Maybe they should also let the car drive with a certain speed (275 km/h or whatever) on a plain tarmac ground, videotape it and use the video to analyse if any part of the cars bends too much. Hell, you can even see it during the normal race TV coverage that those RBR wings aren't flexing normal. Since when does FIA need 100% proof for punishments let alone prohibitions?
pannenmann is offline  
Quote
Old 2 Aug 2010, 22:03 (Ref:2738452)   #27
Teretonga
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,346
Teretonga is going for a new world record!Teretonga is going for a new world record!Teretonga is going for a new world record!Teretonga is going for a new world record!Teretonga is going for a new world record!Teretonga is going for a new world record!Teretonga is going for a new world record!Teretonga is going for a new world record!
Of course Red Bull can turn up at the next race with a wing that looks identical but doesn't have the same 'bendy-ness' built into it, (if thats what it is thats enabling the advantage) and it could pass the test....
But they may not qualify as well either...

If it passes the rule, and the test, it remains a secret.... Until the opposition can work out a way of doing it.
after all this is F1 and you are allowed to have engineering secrets...
They haven't banned those yet...
Teretonga is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 00:00 (Ref:2738500)   #28
manwell
Racer
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location:
Australia
Posts: 333
manwell should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by duke_toaster View Post
It's just common sense. The rules are that movable aerodynamic devices (including intentionally flexing wings) are banned. To quote Rick Astley, you know the rules and so do I. The rules also say that the FIA can tweak the tests to make sure that we don't get flexiwings. That's what the FIA have done.
Thats not what the rules are. Movable aerodynamic devices ARE allowed.
Actually SPECIFICALLY the front wings.
Yes a slightly different situation, but they are allowed.

And yes they are allowed to flex. The FIA even state this in their technical manual that they are allowed to flex 10mm at 50kg's. Red Bulls do, so they comply.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rory View Post
Why is it a shame GTRMagic? I see RB gaining an unfair advantage here. As other have said, flexible wings are outlayed.... just because it doesn't flex to that extent during a test, does not mean it is not flexing during the race. Any idiot can see the advantage they are gaining. And rumours of the floor flexing as well.... it's little wonder they have downforce levels out of this world.

It's a bit like having some trick engine that pokes out 19,000rpm on a test rig and FIA test, but put on the track, somehow mamages to produce another 1000rpm. Sure, they passed the FIA tests but it's cheating in my book, same as the rule that says 85mm above floor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox89 View Post
This isn't like double diffusers or F-Ducts which are technically legal because, although creative, they still comply to the wording of the regulations. This is about something technically illegal that passes a test.

Would you still call it "winging" if Red Bull had fitted a turbo to their engine and simply found a way to hide it from scrutineers? Or would you consider that gaining an unfair advantage?
Rory and Fox 89, every part of a car changes from when its static in parc feme to when its flying down the straight.

For instance, the FIA has a specific tyre size you must use, but dont you think a 245/55 R13 tyre would elongate to a larger diameter when doing 300km/h? That would be outside the rules in "your book" wouldnt it?

Did you not see the view out the back of Alonso's car at Hungary, the "sharks fin" was wobbling from side to side. Its an aerodynamic device and its moving. Against the rules?

The FIA understands that no part of the car is completely stable and thus gives parameters to keep inside.
The parameter for the front wing is 10mm flex at 50kg.
Red Bull complied with that, so whatever "your book" says... no they are NOT cheating.
So they do comply with the wording of the regulations, just like a double diffuser of F-duct.
Hence for every race this season they have passed scruitineering.

Last edited by manwell; 3 Aug 2010 at 00:08.
manwell is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 00:05 (Ref:2738503)   #29
Marbot
Retired
20KPINAL
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
United Kingdom
Posts: 22,897
Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!
Maybe Red Bull's front wing is electrically heated (think about it)?
Marbot is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 00:50 (Ref:2738520)   #30
Fox89
Veteran
 
Fox89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
United Kingdom
Leamington Spa, UK
Posts: 1,107
Fox89 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridFox89 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
The FIA understands that no part of the car is completely stable and thus gives parameters to keep inside.
The parameter for the front wing is 10mm flex at 50kg
.

Very true. However:

Quote:
No part having an aerodynamic influence and no part of the bodywork, with the exception of the skid block
in 3.13 above, may under any circumstances be located below the reference plane.
I believe this is where the problem lies. Red Bull quite rightly state that their wing passes the load tests. But if at high speed the end of their wing is dipping below the reference plane, it is in contravention of the regulations.

It is possible I have misunderstood the complaint McLaren and co were putting forward, but I believe this is accurate.
Fox89 is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 04:14 (Ref:2738557)   #31
gti5notrkt
Racer
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location:
Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 178
gti5notrkt should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Why is the FIA messing around with 50-100kg static weights on the wings?. The FIA must have access to a wind tunnel. Stick them in there and run it up to 190mph and see how much it flexes. That's a real test.

Jon.
gti5notrkt is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 04:55 (Ref:2738565)   #32
St00ge
Veteran
 
St00ge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 702
St00ge should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by gti5notrkt View Post
Why is the FIA messing around with 50-100kg static weights on the wings?. The FIA must have access to a wind tunnel. Stick them in there and run it up to 190mph and see how much it flexes. That's a real test.

Jon.
Yeah there is a wind tunnel out the back of the pits at most race tracks
St00ge is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 06:02 (Ref:2738583)   #33
manwell
Racer
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location:
Australia
Posts: 333
manwell should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox89 View Post
.

Very true. However:



I believe this is where the problem lies. Red Bull quite rightly state that their wing passes the load tests. But if at high speed the end of their wing is dipping below the reference plane, it is in contravention of the regulations.

It is possible I have misunderstood the complaint McLaren and co were putting forward, but I believe this is accurate.

Taking your point and running with it.

Say you every day road car has a 2 litre engine. Usually if you look up the specs its actually 1990cc or something similar.

But i think its pretty safe to assume that the boffins designing F1 engines would be running right on the limit, so a 2.4L 90deg V8 would be 2400cc

Now im no expert in thermal-dynamics, but are you telling me there would be no difference in the capacity of the engine when its sitting cold in parc ferme or zinging down the straight at 18000rpm.
Im sure an F1 engine generates a lot of heat, and as far as i know when a metal is heated it expands.
So is it not possible that while the car is driving down the straight at 18000rpm the capacity is not exceeding 2.4L by at least a small margain?
manwell is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 08:10 (Ref:2738616)   #34
Sodemo
Veteran
 
Sodemo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
United Kingdom
Solihull, West Mids, UK
Posts: 11,147
Sodemo has a real shot at the podium!Sodemo has a real shot at the podium!Sodemo has a real shot at the podium!Sodemo has a real shot at the podium!Sodemo has a real shot at the podium!
One thing is for sure, if Red Bull have to change their front wing it will affect the whole of the car.
Sodemo is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 08:40 (Ref:2738623)   #35
JamesH
Veteran
 
JamesH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
United Kingdom
Christchurch, Cambs, UK
Posts: 2,126
JamesH has a real shot at the championship!JamesH has a real shot at the championship!JamesH has a real shot at the championship!JamesH has a real shot at the championship!JamesH has a real shot at the championship!JamesH has a real shot at the championship!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox89 View Post
.
Quote:
No part having an aerodynamic influence and no part of the bodywork, with the exception of the skid block
in 3.13 above, may under any circumstances be located below the reference plane.
Very true. However:



I believe this is where the problem lies. Red Bull quite rightly state that their wing passes the load tests. But if at high speed the end of their wing is dipping below the reference plane, it is in contravention of the regulations.

It is possible I have misunderstood the complaint McLaren and co were putting forward, but I believe this is accurate.
Ah, but the wing IS located above the reference plain. The fact it bends down under the huge loads of downforce is irrelevent to the rules, as it passes them as they stand, including the load tests.

Well done Red Bull for designing around the rules, as with Mclaren with the F duct and Brawn with the DD.

Now, the FIA just need to improve the tests. Which won't be that difficult - they just need to make the weights bigger. Not that difficult to find out approximately how much downforce the wing produces at top speed. Just use that figure to determine the weight you place on the end. If it deforms too much, ask them to change the design. Simples.

Not a huge RedBull fan, but think they are being very clever with this one.
JamesH is offline  
__________________
Locost #54 Boldly Leaping where no car has gone before. And then being T-boned. Damn.
Survivor of the 2008 2CV 24h!! 2 engines, one accident, 76mph and rain.
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 10:04 (Ref:2738662)   #36
Sodemo
Veteran
 
Sodemo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
United Kingdom
Solihull, West Mids, UK
Posts: 11,147
Sodemo has a real shot at the podium!Sodemo has a real shot at the podium!Sodemo has a real shot at the podium!Sodemo has a real shot at the podium!Sodemo has a real shot at the podium!
I dont think its any different to the Michelin tyre saga of 2003, when Ferrari & Bridgestone accused Michelin of having wider tyres than were allowed. When measured before the race they complied, but due to the camber characteristics they altered shape when under load.

The FIA then forced Michelin to change their tyres by adjusting the rules around measuring tyres, which pretty much handed Ferrari the championship as McLaren and Williams struggled to get used to the new front tyre after Monza of that year.
Sodemo is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 11:48 (Ref:2738705)   #37
Fox89
Veteran
 
Fox89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
United Kingdom
Leamington Spa, UK
Posts: 1,107
Fox89 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridFox89 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Ah, but the wing IS located above the reference plain. The fact it bends down under the huge loads of downforce is irrelevent to the rules
But the rules say "under any circumstances" not, "when stationary". So why is one circumstance where the bodywork is lower than the reference plane irrelevant?

Quote:
So is it not possible that while the car is driving down the straight at 18000rpm the capacity is not exceeding 2.4L by at least a small margain?
I suppose! I wouldn't know on that one. I would imagine the difficulty there would come in proving it, I don't know if the FIA has another test for that. Perhaps that's an area where you may be able to contravene the rules but get away with it because it is unenforceable. Such is life!
Fox89 is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 11:51 (Ref:2738708)   #38
pannenmann
Racer
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Germany
Bavaria
Posts: 188
pannenmann should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Well, like I said, the pictures seen on TV of the wing should be sufficient to ban the wing. Yet they decide to fiddle around with that 50kg test that is completely bull. Reminds me of that whole Ferrari bodywork incident (dunno which year it was) where they didn't even know what to measure where - or at least pretended so. Sometimes I wonder if they are really this inapt or just trolling the whole world and having a good laugh.
pannenmann is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 12:08 (Ref:2738717)   #39
Marbot
Retired
20KPINAL
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
United Kingdom
Posts: 22,897
Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!
Quote:
Originally Posted by pannenmann View Post
Well, like I said, the pictures seen on TV of the wing should be sufficient to ban the wing. Yet they decide to fiddle around with that 50kg test that is completely bull. Reminds me of that whole Ferrari bodywork incident (dunno which year it was) where they didn't even know what to measure where - or at least pretended so. Sometimes I wonder if they are really this inapt or just trolling the whole world and having a good laugh.
99 was the year that the FIA decided to measure barge board indiscretions with them not actually being fitted to the car!

Why not just have Charlie Whiting standing on the endplate while someone else looks to see what's happening.

It's not going to work though, is it.

Stories like: "Charlie tests Ferrari wing after heavy lunch with Martin Whitmarsh" would be the norm wouldn't they.
Marbot is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 12:40 (Ref:2738745)   #40
Peat
Veteran
 
Peat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
United Kingdom
Dahn Sahf
Posts: 1,589
Peat has a real shot at the podium!Peat has a real shot at the podium!Peat has a real shot at the podium!Peat has a real shot at the podium!Peat has a real shot at the podium!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marbot View Post
Maybe Red Bull's front wing is electrically heated (think about it)?
Cracked it!
Peat is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 12:54 (Ref:2738748)   #41
duke_toaster
Veteran
 
duke_toaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
European Union
Englandland
Posts: 5,100
duke_toaster should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridduke_toaster should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
His Holiness Sir Ted of Kravitz mentioned that the loads are around 200kg on the front wing - perhaps that's the level they need to be tested at?
duke_toaster is offline  
__________________
Marbot : "Ironically, the main difference between a Red Bull and a Virgin is that Red Bull can make parts of its car smaller and floppier."
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 13:26 (Ref:2738763)   #42
manwell
Racer
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location:
Australia
Posts: 333
manwell should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox89 View Post
But the rules say "under any circumstances" not, "when stationary". So why is one circumstance where the bodywork is lower than the reference plane irrelevant?
If you want to get super specific, "under any circumstances" is still a little bit in the grey area.
When the wings arent on the car if you sit them on the ground they are below the reference plane.
Not being attached to the car is "any circumstance".

The rules cant be 100% accurate in every circumstace, thats why they have the 10mm deflection at 50kg rule.

If you want to be that specific "under any circumstances", then due to the rotation of the earth, 1kg is a different measuremet closer to the equator than it is at the poles.
Hey, i'll even go all out and say does it mention that the 10mm/50kg deflection as to be measured in atmospheric conditions?
What if you measured the deflection in water, it would be a lot less.
There is nothng in the rules to say it has to be measured in earths atmosphere....... hmmmm.

Last edited by manwell; 3 Aug 2010 at 13:54.
manwell is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 14:03 (Ref:2738783)   #43
Marbot
Retired
20KPINAL
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
United Kingdom
Posts: 22,897
Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peat View Post
Cracked it!
I was thinking that the wing already has an electrical supply for the adjustable flaps, so no suspicions would be aroused by any other additional device that happened to use the same electrical connections.
Marbot is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 14:33 (Ref:2738802)   #44
Fox89
Veteran
 
Fox89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
United Kingdom
Leamington Spa, UK
Posts: 1,107
Fox89 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridFox89 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
If you want to get super specific, "under any circumstances" is still a little bit in the grey area.
When the wings arent on the car if you sit them on the ground they are below the reference plane.
Not being attached to the car is "any circumstance".
Yes... although one would have to wonder if they still count as 'bodywork' when they're not attached

So I'm not sure your analogy quite works. Although I think I understand your point, which is that it is impossible to legislate for 'any circumstance' and we should use some common sense. And I'm all for that.

The wording is quite clear:

Quote:
no part of the bodywork, with the exception of the skid block
in 3.13 above, may under any circumstances be located below the reference plane.
So let me ask this: why would this rule cease to apply when the car is in motion?
Fox89 is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 14:40 (Ref:2738804)   #45
ptclaus98
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
United States
Posts: 1,767
ptclaus98 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by alc View Post
Sorry, this is not necessarily so, because a preload can be arranged - but don't ask me how it's done with a wing.
I believe the answer, or part of it anyways, is in the layering of the carbon fiber, so that if the load is in a certain direction the wing can flex, but when it is applied from front to back over the top of the wing, it holds up. In this case, it might be possible for the flexible wings to still pass scrutineering, right?
ptclaus98 is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 14:47 (Ref:2738805)   #46
ptclaus98
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
United States
Posts: 1,767
ptclaus98 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marbot View Post
Maybe Red Bull's front wing is electrically heated (think about it)?
Yeah, but if you're constantly heating and cooling the resin over a race weekend, wouldn't the wing start to deform or something?
ptclaus98 is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 14:53 (Ref:2738808)   #47
Marbot
Retired
20KPINAL
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
United Kingdom
Posts: 22,897
Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!Marbot is going for a new lap record!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptclaus98 View Post
Yeah, but if you're constantly heating and cooling the resin over a race weekend, wouldn't the wing start to deform or something?
I suppose it depends on how you've put the wing and any heating elements together. Maybe it's all done by magic!
Marbot is offline  
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 15:05 (Ref:2738814)   #48
JamesH
Veteran
 
JamesH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
United Kingdom
Christchurch, Cambs, UK
Posts: 2,126
JamesH has a real shot at the championship!JamesH has a real shot at the championship!JamesH has a real shot at the championship!JamesH has a real shot at the championship!JamesH has a real shot at the championship!JamesH has a real shot at the championship!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox89 View Post
But the rules say "under any circumstances" not, "when stationary". So why is one circumstance where the bodywork is lower than the reference plane irrelevant
Even when distorted, the wing is still 'located' above the correct plane. Its location point is where ity attaches to the car - that stays above the reference plane.

Think about your arm, stretched out. It's located at your shoulder. As you get tired it droops down, but it's still located at your shoulder - the location point hasn't moved

The wording of the rule is bad (where have we heard that before). They should say that at no point should any part of the wing move below the plane of reference, even in use. Add that to decent distortion values (50kg is no-where near enough), and the problem goes away.

That said, I still say well done to RB for doing this in the first place. I like a bit of proper thinking to get round rules.

(First person to mention the phrase 'spirit of the rules' get a raspberry).
JamesH is offline  
__________________
Locost #54 Boldly Leaping where no car has gone before. And then being T-boned. Damn.
Survivor of the 2008 2CV 24h!! 2 engines, one accident, 76mph and rain.
Quote
Old 3 Aug 2010, 16:15 (Ref:2738840)   #49
MGDavid
Veteran
 
MGDavid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
England
Berkshire
Posts: 3,809
MGDavid is going for a new lap record!MGDavid is going for a new lap record!MGDavid is going for a new lap record!MGDavid is going for a new lap record!MGDavid is going for a new lap record!MGDavid is going for a new lap record!
Quote:
Originally Posted by manwell View Post
If you want to get super specific, "under any circumstances" is still a little bit in the grey area.
When the wings arent on the car if you sit them on the ground they are below the reference plane.
Not being attached to the car is "any circumstance".

The rules cant be 100% accurate in every circumstace, thats why they have the 10mm deflection at 50kg rule.

If you want to be that specific "under any circumstances", then due to the rotation of the earth, 1kg is a different measuremet closer to the equator than it is at the poles.
Hey, i'll even go all out and say does it mention that the 10mm/50kg deflection as to be measured in atmospheric conditions?
What if you measured the deflection in water, it would be a lot less.
There is nothng in the rules to say it has to be measured in earths atmosphere....... hmmmm.
now you're just being silly - and you know it
MGDavid is offline  
__________________
a salary slave no more...
Quote
Old 6 Aug 2010, 12:01 (Ref:2740340)   #50
St00ge
Veteran
 
St00ge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 702
St00ge should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
http://www.f1complete.com/2010-news/17751?task=view

Interesting article, the bit about Vettels front wing failure in Silverstone is interesting because I remember when Horner was being interview at one point during the weekend and talked about the only other new wing was showing signs of cracking and had to have Newey ok it before the race.
St00ge is offline  
Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Delta wing , inverted delta wing effuno Racing Technology 3 8 Apr 2007 13:45
GP2 Tests hotwheels National & International Single Seaters 2 16 Aug 2006 11:47
Crack Tests Mark5000 Historic Racing Today 7 3 Feb 2006 18:21
New rear wing tests from Imola onwards... Sodemo Formula One 1 25 Apr 2005 19:40
F3 Tests overflow National & International Single Seaters 26 19 Oct 2003 21:36


All times are GMT. The time now is 21:53.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Original Website Copyright © 1998-2003 Craig Antil. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2004-2021 Royalridge Computing. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2021-2022 Grant MacDonald. All Rights Reserved.