Flexiwings 2024

[Vanja #66]

Mass dampers are not legal. That is the point of a non-traditional implementation.

Such implementation still cannot change the basic laws of physics. That said, next person to argue W15 front wing is acting like a mass damper should really lay down the math to demonstrate such a possibility and then connect the results with available video/gif evidence

[ispano6]

This cannot be further from the truth

Please offer a rational explanation then if you know precisely the correct location where such a system should go and convince me.

You don't place a mass damper outside of symmetry plane and you don't put it on a cantilever. You make a single unit and not on two separate flexible cantilevers that can and will osciallste at different frequencies. Ideal location for a mass damper targeting front axle is in the intersection of the symmetry plane and front axle plane. In practice, it will sit in the nose and as close as possible to the bulkhead, you know - like Renault actually made it

Renaults solution is banned and the solution itself is more or less primary purpose. You have to learn to unlearn what you think you know and use materials and ideas that aren't obvious. I see the FW being more than just an aerodynamic element and as a designer and engineer I would pursue a multitude of functions that would aim to solve what antiquated mass dampers did but with structures that are more or less inspired by solutions found in nature and biology. Mimicking such behaviors or even stumbling on them by accident and then gaining an understanding is one thing, but completely not accounting for low speed behavior to satisfy high speed behavior is just too naive and short-sighted that no self respecting technical director would not appoint a team to look into it!

As a lifelong student of many disciplines, my mind goes to the morphology and movement of manta rays and hummingbirds, two very graceful beings that are well studied and offer a wealth of ideas on biological mechanics and how they can be applied in seemingly static yet dynamic ways.

[SiLo]

Please offer a rational explanation then if you know precisely the correct location where such a system should go and convince me.

You don't place a mass damper outside of symmetry plane and you don't put it on a cantilever. You make a single unit and not on two separate flexible cantilevers that can and will osciallste at different frequencies. Ideal location for a mass damper targeting front axle is in the intersection of the symmetry plane and front axle plane. In practice, it will sit in the nose and as close as possible to the bulkhead, you know - like Renault actually made it

Renaults solution is banned and the solution itself is more or less primary purpose. You have to learn to unlearn what you think you know and use materials and ideas that aren't obvious. I see the FW being more than just an aerodynamic element and as a designer and engineer I would pursue a multitude of functions that would aim to solve what antiquated mass dampers did but with structures that are more or less inspired by solutions found in nature and biology. Mimicking such behaviors or even stumbling on them by accident and then gaining an understanding is one thing, but completely not accounting for low speed behavior to satisfy high speed behavior is just too naive and short-sighted that no self respecting technical director would not appoint a team to look into it!

As a lifelong student of many disciplines, my mind goes to the morphology and movement of manta rays and hummingbirds, two very graceful beings that are well studied and offer a wealth of ideas on biological mechanics and how they can be applied in seemingly static yet dynamic ways.

This reads like some kind of fan-fic.

[ispano6]

You don't place a mass damper outside of symmetry plane and you don't put it on a cantilever. You make a single unit and not on two separate flexible cantilevers that can and will osciallste at different frequencies. Ideal location for a mass damper targeting front axle is in the intersection of the symmetry plane and front axle plane. In practice, it will sit in the nose and as close as possible to the bulkhead, you know - like Renault actually made it

Renaults solution is banned and the solution itself is more or less primary purpose. You have to learn to unlearn what you think you know and use materials and ideas that aren't obvious. I see the FW being more than just an aerodynamic element and as a designer and engineer I would pursue a multitude of functions that would aim to solve what antiquated mass dampers did but with structures that are more or less inspired by solutions found in nature and biology. Mimicking such behaviors or even stumbling on them by accident and then gaining an understanding is one thing, but completely not accounting for low speed behavior to satisfy high speed behavior is just too naive and short-sighted that no self respecting technical director would not appoint a team to look into it!

As a lifelong student of many disciplines, my mind goes to the morphology and movement of manta rays and hummingbirds, two very graceful beings that are well studied and offer a wealth of ideas on biological mechanics and how they can be applied in seemingly static yet dynamic ways.

This reads like some kind of fan-fic.

Ah yes, one that can only be achieved while in a heightened sense of awareness.
One would hope that the pinnacle of terrestrial motorsport looks across mediums to find novel solutions.
And again, it could be accident that they are mimicking these tendencies that as a person who studied marine biology for some time see them as genius if not intentional. If the engineers were able to also factor in mass-damping in addition to generating beneficial oscillations then the wing performs at least 3 'primary' functions. Or, I am overthinking things, humans aren't that smart, and it must be aliens! (Yes, the medium is water, not air and thus not a like-for-like medium, but the morphology is the focus)

The oscillatory motion of the wings in Manta creates vortices of water that produce thrust forward. Manta’s may also produce special kind of effect called a leading edge vortex. This vortex of water, along the front plane of the manta wing can generate considerable thrust and “suck the wing up.” The vortices adhere to the leading edge of the wing and body and eventually roll of the wing tips. The spiraling of these vortices creates water movement in the reverse direction.

Video animation depicting flapping sting ray wings generating beneficial vortex


https://deepseanews.com/2013/08/the-sup ... anta-rays/

[Vanja #66]

Renaults solution is banned and the solution itself is more or less primary purpose. You have to learn to unlearn what you think you know and use materials and ideas that aren't obvious. I see the FW being more than just an aerodynamic element and as a designer and engineer I would pursue a multitude of functions that would aim to solve what antiquated mass dampers did but with structures that are more or less inspired by solutions found in nature and biology. Mimicking such behaviors or even stumbling on them by accident and then gaining an understanding is one thing, but completely not accounting for low speed behavior to satisfy high speed behavior is just too naive and short-sighted that no self respecting technical director would not appoint a team to look into it!

As a lifelong student of many disciplines, my mind goes to the morphology and movement of manta rays and hummingbirds, two very graceful beings that are well studied and offer a wealth of ideas on biological mechanics and how they can be applied in seemingly static yet dynamic ways.

Mate, I understand what you're saying and I fully support and practice such an engineering approach. One of Chapman's engineering rules was - every part must have at least 3 functions - aiming towards cutting down on mass, costs and manufacturing times.

However, for reasons I already explained, using front wing as a damping element is not good because it unbalances front axle (the way Merc did it with so many oscillations) and also because it can cause uneven oscillations on left and right side too. Another thing, which I already said right away, Mercedes FW shows dissipation, not damping. Good damping is preferably 1 oscialltion, 2 at most. More than that is either a very underdampened design (which is opposite of a tuned mass damper) or simply natural dissipstion. I'll leave things at that, as the original point is whether Merc FW is a mass damper or not

[ispano6]

Renaults solution is banned and the solution itself is more or less primary purpose. You have to learn to unlearn what you think you know and use materials and ideas that aren't obvious. I see the FW being more than just an aerodynamic element and as a designer and engineer I would pursue a multitude of functions that would aim to solve what antiquated mass dampers did but with structures that are more or less inspired by solutions found in nature and biology. Mimicking such behaviors or even stumbling on them by accident and then gaining an understanding is one thing, but completely not accounting for low speed behavior to satisfy high speed behavior is just too naive and short-sighted that no self respecting technical director would not appoint a team to look into it!

As a lifelong student of many disciplines, my mind goes to the morphology and movement of manta rays and hummingbirds, two very graceful beings that are well studied and offer a wealth of ideas on biological mechanics and how they can be applied in seemingly static yet dynamic ways.

Mate, I understand what you're saying and I fully support and practice such an engineering approach. One of Chapman's engineering rules was - every part must have at least 3 functions - aiming towards cutting down on mass, costs and manufacturing times.

However, for reasons I already explained, using front wing as a damping element is not good because it unbalances front axle (the way Merc did it with so many oscillations) and also because it can cause uneven oscillations on left and right side too. Another thing, which I already said right away, Mercedes FW shows dissipation, not damping. Good damping is preferably 1 oscialltion, 2 at most. More than that is either a very underdampened design (which is opposite of a tuned mass damper) or simply natural dissipstion. I'll leave things at that, as the original point is whether Merc FW is a mass damper or not

I can't say for sure what is going on with the MB flexiwings, and maybe I give their engineers too much credit, but I can accept that the movement is not accidental and that it is a design feature. As a platform, something has to dampen, absorb, and dissipate the energy from the forces of hitting the curb. In the animated GIFs we see that despite taking the curb slightly on one side, both sides of the wing oscillate with a relative even motion. I see what you are saying about dampening vs dissipating, and agree that something else is likely performing the initial dampening force (I surmise it is the initial bowing up of the wing on impact) but the dissipation of that force appears to translate into motion and so am curious how it adds performance and solves known problems that the team(and Mercedes as a car manufacturer) is historically known for employing(mass dampers!). It is a stabilizing factor that they've chosen to employ and also the way they've changed the inner most flaps create a contour that generates a structure that promotes oscillations and flapping, without doubt. It coincides with the bulge that was added to the suspension system and while some call that the "mass damper" it obviously is part of the philosophy of maintaining compliance over various surface and speed conditions and works in conjunction with the designed behaviors of the FW.



https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/cool ... /10633219/

[organic]

Vasseur and Horner are in talks with the FIA about the use of flexible wings in F1, which clearly benefits Mercedes & McLaren.

https://racingnews365.com/red-bull-and- ... l-f1-issue

Fred said,

"That is a discussion I don't want to have with you," when asked.

"I will have it with [FIA single-seater director] Nikolas Tombazis, but we have to respect the decision of the FIA, but we will deal with it internally with the FIA."

Horner said:

"I think the regulations are very clear, and I think that is an FIA issue,

"Obviously, it is [the FIA] tests that they passed, but then you have to look at the wording of the regulations.

"If you look back to 2021, certainly around Baku time, there was a change to the regulations - and even though our wings passed the test, it was exploiting air elasticity.

"It is an FIA issue, we'll leave it and trust in them to deal with it, but if it is acceptable, then you have to join it."

Marko discussed it after qualifying and now Vasseur & Horner both with similar messaging about it. Seems that there could be more to the flexing drama this season

Rare Red Bull, Ferrari alliance.

[AR3-GP]

It doesn't sound like there is anything coming. If there was any meat on the bones, the two teams would have protested. The fact that they are claiming they will "trust the FIA" points to a fruitless adventure.

Horners remark that they may have to join in suggest their concerns have fallen on deaf ears.

I also doubt the FIA will disturb the current balance of power because it's not in the interest of the sport. As somone said earlier "We like what we see here, move along".

[organic]

It doesn't sound like there is anything coming. If there was any meat on the bones, the two teams would have protested. The fact that they are claiming they will "trust the FIA" points to a fruitless adventure.

Horners remark that they may have to join in suggest their concerns have fallen on deaf ears.

I also doubt the FIA will disturb the current balance of power because it's not in the interest of the sport. As somone said earlier "We like what we see here, move along".

It was only Red Bull complaining before, when they said there was nothing doing. Two of the four 'top' teams coming forward on it could make it a bigger issue

[Vanja #66]

The most likely outcome is an internal clarification on what is allowed in terms of deflection tests, testing points, reference for deflection measurment etc. Neither of those two teams can make a dramatic breakthrough this year, but incorporating new clarifications could be important for next season. Not sure why RB tried the front wing with outboard adjuster so many times and almost never used it, they may have made the floor shift the Cp to offset less flexible front wing and with the more flexible fw design it's simply too much

[chrisc90]

I mean if Ferrari are jumping in on it aswell, then that shows there must be something going on.

Merc made big gains with their revised front wing they brought monaco/race after.

Certainly more collateral to this than the fiddle brake valve some twitter journalists are banging on about.

[SSJ4]

so what was the difference between astons flexi wing from last year compared to merc and mclarens flexi wings this year.
That it got outlawed during the season?

[morefirejules08]

I mean if Ferrari are jumping in on it aswell, then that shows there must be something going on.

Merc made big gains with their revised front wing they brought monaco/race after.

Certainly more collateral to this than the fiddle brake valve some twitter journalists are banging on about.

Redbulls decline has been far more dramatic than Mercs improvements

[chrisc90]

I mean if Ferrari are jumping in on it aswell, then that shows there must be something going on.

Merc made big gains with their revised front wing they brought monaco/race after.

Certainly more collateral to this than the fiddle brake valve some twitter journalists are banging on about.

Redbulls decline has been far more dramatic than Mercs improvements

Whatever Merc did with the front of their car it turned it around. It was a dog before, not it’s a 2* race winner this season alone.

[Henri]

I mean if Ferrari are jumping in on it aswell, then that shows there must be something going on.

Merc made big gains with their revised front wing they brought monaco/race after.

Certainly more collateral to this than the fiddle brake valve some twitter journalists are banging on about.

Redbulls decline has been far more dramatic than Mercs improvements

It was the brakes