Why ‘mini-DRS’ won’t be the last flexi-wing controversy in Formula 1

Formula 1’s off-track political battles can often be just as interesting as the on-track action. The battle to get technical innovations approved on your car and away from rivals has long been the key to getting to the front of the field.

One of those battlegrounds this year was the flexi-wings, with great interest in both the front and the rear of various cars. The situation is sensitive, because flexible bodies operate in a gray area of ​​regulations.

Wings pass the static load tests in the pits, but it is impossible to make parts that do not deflect to some extent when exposed to the enormous aerodynamic loads on the track.

The core of the conflict, therefore, is how much movement the FIA ​​considers fair game, and how much it considers blatant exploitation. These are lines that can move – especially if competitors start lobbying with complaints.

The most recent debate was about McLaren’s ‘mini-DRS’ on the rear wings. Although the design fully passed statutory load tests, rivals’ politics forced the FIA ​​into discussions before agreeing to make a change.

While the Baku bend on the top flap of McLaren’s rear wing was extremely obvious, it’s not the only trick seen in the pit lane this year. But as always, investigating rivals depends on the level of intervention and whether it is seen as taking liberties or not.

Red Bull Racing RB16B reflective rear wing

Photo by: Giorgio Piola

Ferrari SF21 rear wing FP1, Azerbaijan Grand Prix

Photo by: Giorgio Piola

McLaren’s rear wing was the main talking point in Azerbaijan, but it was clear that some rivals are rotating the rear wing backwards to reduce drag, although some do this to a greater extent than others.

As the FIA ​​had asked teams in 2021 to add goals on the rear wings (see above, right, yellow dots added to Ferrari’s rear wing) so it could view rear view camera footage and see how much flexion there was If this behavior occurs, this behavior must now mean that it is considered acceptable.

Nothing new

Controlling the amount of flexion used by the teams as a means of increasing downforce and reducing drag is not even a new problem for F1. Each regulatory cycle raises more and more questions as teams try to apply their old knowledge to the latest regulations.

For example, we saw teams in the early to mid-2000s attempt to implement slot gap manipulation on their rear wings to reduce drag.

Slot gap separators were seen as a means to ban the practice. Meanwhile, ongoing adjustments have also been made to the static tests performed on both the front and rear wings to limit the number of flexion teams built into their designs over the years.

Although the bend of the rear wing elements was more noticeable, the teams also worked to utilize the bend of the front wing.

Its exploitation was fully exposed when Formula 1 entered a new regulatory era in 2009. Not only were the aerodynamic rules much more restrictive, but images of the front wing installation were also much more easily available thanks to the placement of the cameras.

Kimi Raikkonen, Ferrari F60

Photo by: Andrew Ferraro / Motorsport Images

The loss of the larger and more complex bargeboard structures had also meant that the front wing had to provide more support from a wake control perspective.

Its design and bending were used as a means to push the wake outward and reduce turbulence that would otherwise be absorbed beneath the floor and cause flow instability in the diffuser.

The governing body has been fighting a protracted battle on this front during that period, but just like today, there are only the static tests that the teams have to pass.

This created space for multiple directions of development as each team used the wing’s built-in flexibility to support its given objectives.

During the aforementioned period, the teams were notably flexing their wings in different ways. Some used vertical flexion so that the outer part of the wing would bend toward the track surface, while others rotated their wing assembly backward.

The different approaches clearly fit each of their end goals, based on their design configurations, both local and downstream. It also made it much harder for the FIA ​​to police as they had to find different ways to prevent these different practices.

Likewise, it appears that the amount and type of flexion used on this current generation of front wings does not follow a common theme, with each team finding a way to flex the wing in a way that benefits the overall objectives.

Furthermore, it appears that there is also independent bending of the components, making it difficult to determine where the deformation occurs and when.

FIA goal test model for the front wing

Photo by: Giorgio Piola

In an effort to better understand and perhaps help formulate the regulations in the future, it has been keeping a closer eye on front wing flexion since the Belgian Grand Prix.

Teams must now place dots on the front wing elements and end plate, which can be used as a reference in the images captured by new cameras mounted in the usual position on the side of the nose.

It’s never really been a question of who uses flexi-wings to improve car performance, as they all do to some extent.

However, it is more about ensuring that practice does not result in a design that clearly operates in a manner that passes static load testing, but deforms excessively while on track.

This would not only lead to a new arms race between the teams as they all pursue similar builds, but could also create an unsafe development environment as the boundaries are pushed beyond the known limits of materials too quickly.