Mclaren Mercedes MP4-25

[747heavy]

and you would probably need to run a bit more font wing to get the extra performance out of the f-duct/rear wing.
Otherwise you may just end up understeering through the fast corners.
This will add to the "drag penality" - IMHO

Anyway, there are different ways to skin a cat, we will see what the teams learn and decide after there back to back tests on Friday.
I would think no F-duct is a sensible approach to Monza.

[marcush.]

and you would probably need to run a bit more font wing to get the extra performance out of the f-duct/rear wing.
Otherwise you may just end up understeering through the fast corners.
This will add to the "drag penality" - IMHO

Anyway, there are different ways to skin a cat, we will see what the teams learn and decide after there back to back tests on Friday.
I would think no F-duct is a sensible approach to Monza.

the 6 degree of adjustment range won´t be enough?

[747heavy]

valid point Marcus, perhaps they are
but by the rules you would only be able, to make use of it for one corner/straight, and
have to "suffer" /compromise on the other.

[marcush.]

I could almost think of a wing thats featuring f duct suitable camber and flap in the middle half and the outer region is teatray shaped ..best of both worlds.The outer section does help the middle one to be efficient ,but does not really contribute to downforce itself and te middlesection will help createsome extra df in the corners and can be stalled on the straights...

[raymondu999]

I don't know why, but that suggestion of an almost two-part wing with inner/outer sections brought up a thought of Renault's Hungary RW.

[747heavy]

I could almost think of a wing thats featuring f duct suitable camber and flap in the middle half and the outer region is teatray shaped ..best of both worlds.The outer section does help the middle one to be efficient ,but does not really contribute to downforce itself and te middlesection will help createsome extra df in the corners and can be stalled on the straights...

Yes I know pefectly what you mean Marcus.
We could call it a variable camber wing.
Just for giggles, would be interesting if you can make it "passive" (fully integrated into the rear wing only) so you don´t have the additional crosssection and wetted area of the shark fin.
Maybe MGP pops up with something like that

in a crude way something like this?

[747heavy]

I think Ferrari run a smaller (not max. width) rear wing in Monza in 2008



maybe you could take this idea more to the extremes.
The downside is, that the centre section of the wing is in the downwash of the engine cover, roll hoop, F-duct, so it is not the most efficient place to create extra downforce and then stall it. (but it´s possible).




A wing along the centre downwash wing idea of the FIA, would probably be a better option, if you could then stall, the outer parts via F-duct or similar techniques.

[siskue2005]

you got to know that they are not just stalling the central part
the central slit has opening behind which runs all through the wing, and stalling the entire wing in the process

[marcush.]

of course they are....the idea is to have a stalling wing in the middle half and hafe the wing at the extremes reduce to the monza type profile to reduce crosssection .this way around you still had additional downforce for the corners
but less of a penalty in terms of drag then with a ful width f-duct wing.

[feynman]

Nice, a hybrid, a medium Canada central section that we all know can be efficiently f-ducted, which twists out to two Monza tea-trays (or less).

You'd probably need more numbers than anyone here has access to, to really know if it made any sense, and knowing the way the cruel universe works, the numbers and efficiency would come up short, our dreams would be dashed, but still, it'd be fun to plot the graphs and find a surprising sweet-spot over in left-field.

Anyone got the specfic rules to hand on that one? Are the shapes and profiles too regulated in that area, or is there theoretically just about enough lattitude for some team aero-maniac to go buck-wild with the CAD deform tools.

[marcush.]

I´m looking forward to this weekend ..Renault has sprung a few surprise this year with their aerodevelopment ,didn´t they?
Maybe We can say we have anticipated it all the time..but then ,you will be right the sweet spot of something like this may be not good enough to pursue the idea.
sometimes you just have to decide what to do .. I´m genuinely eager to see the f-duct count come Q1...

[feynman]

What about if you did it the other way round, feed the stalling airflow up the rear-wing endfences (like Mercedes, but not quite as poorly), out to two short f-ducted sections which quickly twist into a single central flat Monza wing.

Your critical downforce generating elements are now away from the mess coming over the engine cover, might let you run narrower than a single central element.
(You can then lose the sharkfin, and get the switch and ducting down lower too. Just a pity you moved the exhausts to the floor, they'd have been handily placed up-top)

So, two smaller, switchable, df generating elements outwide, connected by a shallow beam; better or worse, more or less efficient?

[ringo]

I could almost think of a wing thats featuring f duct suitable camber and flap in the middle half and the outer region is teatray shaped ..best of both worlds.The outer section does help the middle one to be efficient ,but does not really contribute to downforce itself and te middlesection will help createsome extra df in the corners and can be stalled on the straights...

One thing though, the most effective part of the f duct slot on the back of the wing, is near the end plates.
The centre doesn't give much load reduction when stalled as compared to the outer regions.
I could imagine Renault, with their creative wing ideas, may have considered your solution though.

[allstaruk08]

[img][IMG]http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/7811 ... h59m1s.jpg[/img]

Uploaded with ImageShack.us[/img]

[747heavy]

something like this wing with an f-duct - why not