Lotus E20 VD

[Owen.C93]

The diffuser is naturally very DF/Drag efficient. So the idea of a complex/draggy system being fitted to route 2 small ducts of air to blow over the diffuser and then switch it off with DRS seems a bit of a waste.

The Merc system of stalling a very DF/Drag inefficient front wing and also balancing DF levels during DRS use seems much more beneficial.

[N12ck]

A reflection that has a clear edge ? :O Also how does a hole make something blacker ? A shadow makes something blacker, the hole you are saying its reflection should show the same color as the endplate, no ?

that is a reflection look below the DRS actuator, and you will see it is a perfect reflection of that, this system is not stalling the rear wing IMO

[N12ck]

The diffuser is naturally very DF/Drag efficient. So the idea of a complex/draggy system being fitted to route 2 small ducts of air to blow over the diffuser and then switch it off with DRS seems a bit of a waste.

The Merc system of stalling a very DF/Drag inefficient front wing and also balancing DF levels during DRS use seems much more beneficial.

It is not for drag reduction it is for downforce creation, and to remove the extra drag incurred by that downforce produced when DRS is activated

[bhall]

There's no reason to create that mess if the goal is just to send air to the diffuser. You'd simply route it from the airbox scoops to the beam wing to the endplates to the diffuser. Otherwise, you leave the underside of the main plane alone at all costs, because that's where downforce comes from.

I think they're venting the air through a slot on top of the main plane. That's perfectly legal.

[Huntresa]

A reflection that has a clear edge ? :O Also how does a hole make something blacker ? A shadow makes something blacker, the hole you are saying its reflection should show the same color as the endplate, no ?

that is a reflection look below the DRS actuator, and you will see it is a perfect reflection of that, this system is not stalling the rear wing IMO

How does a hole reflect and make a hole get a shadow ? are we living in a upside down world?

[N12ck]

find a slot on the rear wing and I will be surprised, it is not blowing the rear wing you need 3 ducts for an F duct,

to huntresa: if it is a hole (which its not) it is ilegal, I have checked the regulations and there is no way it can be legal

[Huntresa]

find a slot on the rear wing and I will be surprised, it is not blowing the rear wing you need 3 ducts for an F duct,

I am not saying it is blowing the rear wing, i just want an explanation for the holes in the endplate, that are in the drawing you are quoteing up top, and also if they arent blowing the RW, then what is the strut going to the RW doing ? Since even there the drawing has a hole.

[Owen.C93]

Here's another angle that proves it is a hole and not a reflection. If we ignore the rest of the system for a second could anyone explain to me how this hole it legal? I thought constant radius rules were in effect or is that only for underneath?

[Huntresa]

another pic to prove the hole,

[bhall]

find a slot on the rear wing and I will be surprised, it is not blowing the rear wing you need 3 ducts for an F duct,

to huntresa: if it is a hole (which its not) it is ilegal, I have checked the regulations and there is no way it can be legal

It looks like there's a slit on top of the main plane, but it's hard to tell. I need a better angle.


(Click to enlarge)

Look at the top of the main plane. And end plates, for that matter.

[Huntresa]

Thank god for sensible ppl

[N12ck]

find a slot on the rear wing and I will be surprised, it is not blowing the rear wing you need 3 ducts for an F duct,

I am not saying it is blowing the rear wing, i just want an explanation for the holes in the endplate, that are in the drawing you are quoteing up top, and also if they arent blowing the RW, then what is the strut going to the RW doing ? Since even there the drawing has a hole.

the duct from the rear wing is the signal duct (like putting your hand over the F duct ala 2010)

lets say it is a hole, the only way it can be legal is if it is in the vertical plane,

[bhall]

You still wouldn't need a duct that feeds directly to the main plane. That can all be done in the end plates, just like Mercedes.

[Huntresa]

find a slot on the rear wing and I will be surprised, it is not blowing the rear wing you need 3 ducts for an F duct,

I am not saying it is blowing the rear wing, i just want an explanation for the holes in the endplate, that are in the drawing you are quoteing up top, and also if they arent blowing the RW, then what is the strut going to the RW doing ? Since even there the drawing has a hole.

the duct from the rear wing is the signal duct (like putting your hand over the F duct ala 2010)

lets say it is a hole, the only way it can be legal is if it is in the vertical plane,

Its the same as mercs holes, no ? Not in the way they work but the way they are designed.

[MarkedOne8]

if it is a hole (which its not) it is ilegal, I have checked the regulations and there is no way it can be legal

Well, Mercedes' holes are consideres as legal ones.Why Lotus' holes would be then ilegal?
I support your theory about blowing diffuser, but you are not right about endplate holes.They are real, they are not reflections.These holes are always exposed to air, but I don't know why.

It's shame they are not going to run this system in race.Grosjean could test it without risk because he has grid penalty.I don't believe he would have that much better Q position than Kimi, so he will probably start behind Kimi.