The mysterious case of F1's flexing rear wings

Regulators strive to stiffen the rules, but team designers keep trying to search out gaps

2021 Mercedes F1 rear wing endplate

Red Bull obtained end plate photos which it claimed showed scuffing, proving flap movement at the slot gap invisible to the rear-facing cameras

Browse pages
Current page

1

Current page

2

Current page

3

Current page

4

Current page

5

Current page

6

Current page

7

Current page

8

Current page

9

Current page

10

Current page

11

Current page

12

Current page

13

Current page

14

Current page

15

Current page

16

Current page

17

Current page

18

Current page

19

Current page

20

Current page

21

Current page

22

Current page

23

Current page

24

Current page

25

Current page

26

Current page

27

Current page

28

Current page

29

Current page

30

Current page

31

Current page

32

Current page

33

Current page

34

Current page

35

Current page

36

Current page

37

Current page

38

Current page

39

Current page

40

Current page

41

Current page

42

Current page

43

Current page

44

Current page

45

Current page

46

Current page

47

Current page

48

Current page

49

Current page

50

Current page

51

Current page

52

Current page

53

Current page

54

Current page

55

Current page

56

Current page

57

Current page

58

Current page

59

Current page

60

Current page

61

Current page

62

Current page

63

Current page

64

Current page

65

Current page

66

Current page

67

Current page

68

Current page

69

Current page

70

Current page

71

Current page

72

Current page

73

Current page

74

Current page

75

Current page

76

Current page

77

Current page

78

Current page

79

Current page

80

Current page

81

Current page

82

Current page

83

Current page

84

Current page

85

Current page

86

Current page

87

Current page

88

Current page

89

Current page

90

Current page

91

Current page

92

Current page

93

Current page

94

Current page

95

Current page

96

Current page

97

Current page

98

Current page

99

Current page

100

Current page

101

Current page

102

Current page

103

Current page

104

Current page

105

Current page

106

Current page

107

Current page

108

Current page

109

Current page

110

Current page

111

Current page

112

Current page

113

Current page

114

Current page

115

Current page

116

Current page

117

Current page

118

Current page

119

Current page

120

Current page

121

Current page

122

Current page

123

Current page

124

Current page

125

Current page

126

Current page

127

Current page

128

Current page

129

Current page

130

Current page

131

Current page

132

Current page

133

Current page

134

Current page

135

Current page

136

Current page

137

Current page

138

Current page

139

Current page

140

Current page

141

Current page

142

Current page

143

Current page

144

Current page

145

Current page

146

Current page

147

Current page

148

Current page

149

Current page

150

Current page

151

Current page

152

Current page

153

Current page

154

Current page

155

Current page

156

Current page

157

Current page

158

Current page

159

Current page

160

Current page

161

Current page

162

Current page

163

Current page

164

Red Bull’s Christian Horner was adamant during the Brazilian Grand Prix that Mercedes had somehow got around the tougher rear wing flexibility tests introduced earlier this season. These were brought in from the French Grand Prix after Mercedes queried Red Bull’s flexing rear wing in Spain.

At least seven of the 10 teams were believed to be using flexibility in the wing mounting to bend the whole construction back and downwards. But they were all passing the regulation static load test. This however did not automatically mean they were legal – because there is a regulation (article 3.8) which states that any bodywork “must be rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car (rigidly secured means not having any degree of freedom)”.

The June technical directive said the FIA reserved the right to test up to 1.5 times the regulatory limit and in addition would use visual evidence of flexing captured by the rearward-facing cameras as measured against bodywork markings the teams were obliged to apply.

Rear wing slot gap graphic It’s a tricky subject to police partly because the hydraulic static load-testing equipment cannot apply the loads the wing sees, which at 150mph will be in the region of 1300N.

Regulation 3.9.6 concerns the wing flap. “The uppermost aerofoil element lying behind the rear wheel centre line may deflect no more than 7mm horizontally when a 500N load is applied horizontally. The load will be applied 870mm above the reference plane at three separate points which lie on the car centre plane and 270mm either side of it. The loads will be applied in a rearward direction…”

So if a wing passed the load test by flexing only 7mm at 500N, and assuming its flex was linear to the load (not necessarily the case), that implies as much as 18mm of flex at the load the wings were actually seeing at 150mph. And at 200mph, considerably more than that.

Regulation 3.9.7 concerns the wing main plane. “The forward-most aerofoil element lying behind the rear wheel centre line and which lies more than 630mm above the reference plane may deflect no more than 2mm vertically when a 200N load is applied vertically. The load will be applied in line with the trailing edge of the element at any point across its width.”

Here the difference between load test and the actual load on track is more dramatic – something like 15 times more. So that 2mm static flex could in theory be 30mm or more out on track.

Although most or all of the teams were believed to be taking advantage of this discrepancy, it was very much in Mercedes’ interest in its battle with Red Bull to point this out. Because the Red Bull, being a high-rake car, has a whole lot more drag to dump than the low-rake Mercedes. So in theory the tougher implementation of the regulation from France would have slowed Mercedes – but more importantly it would have slowed Red Bull a lot more. Hence Red Bull saw that campaign by Mercedes as very much politically motivated and that was the backdrop to why it was irritated by what it believed Mercedes was doing in Brazil – which, if true, would get around the June technical directive.

“No bones about it, if weseeiton the car here it will be protested”

Mercedes had achieved this, Horner believed, through flexing the trailing edge underside of the wing flap. This could give a stall effect beyond a certain threshold which would boost straightline speed but without it being captured on the rearward-facing camera and bodywork markers.

“You can see the straightline performance since Hungary, and particularly in the last two grands prix, has gone exponential,” said Horner in Qatar one week after Brazil, “and that obviously concerns us… Make no bones about it, if we see it on the car here it will be protested.”

Red Bull leaked images taken in Brazil of scuff marks around the Mercedes endplates which it claimed were evidence of the flexing flap. Red Bull personnel, including Adrian Newey, were in deep discussion with FIA technical delegate Nikolas Tombazis in Brazil pressing their case.

“I can’t see anything on this photo other than stuff being scratched – a ghost,” Mercedes team boss Toto Wolff said. “I don’t know where they got this photo from or what it shows.”

For Qatar the FIA informed the teams it would be conducting an experimental new flexibility test “without any regulatory value” (i.e. there would be no penalty for failing it) as part of a process to define further regulation in future. This test was carried out – and every car passed it comfortably, including the Mercedes.

Horner believes that, with the foreknowledge of the test, Mercedes had changed its wing so as not to flex in Qatar. The wings used by Mercedes in Brazil and Qatar were visually identical, but there is no reason why a flexing underside would look any different to one which did not. The difference would only be in the carbon lay-up of the two surfaces.

Ghosts, or clever lateral laminate thinking? Very F1…