McLaren MP4-29 Mercedes

[f1rules]

McLaren is doing the same as rb with the rear wishbones, just more agressively or
http://shrani.si/f/3g/RO/3qxyjbJ9/dms1428ja501.jpg

[avatar]

The cross sections could look something like this, the symmetry line can point up or down 5°.

My guess (previous page) was concave top/bottom to begin with, but as I drew i switched to convex surfaces to give a wing profile....?

[Shakeman]

The McLaren is so fast it's having to use air brakes to make the turn into corners...

[Shakeman]

Maybe the flaps twist into a more horizontal position at high speed.

That would be moveable aero.

[Blackout]

Why would they need to chage the ratio ? maybe they just rotated them
like this (blue instead of red)

[Blanchimont]

The cross sections could look something like this, the symmetry line can point up or down 5°.

My guess (previous page) was concave top/bottom to begin with, but as I drew i switched to convex surfaces to give a wing profile....?

Here http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/wp-content/u ... 2014-2.jpg you can see the profile from above. My picture might exaggerate the real profile, but i think comes close to the real one.

[bonjon1979]

Maybe the flaps twist into a more horizontal position at high speed.

That would be moveable aero.

But from what I remember of the flexi-wings if it passes the test then even if we can see them bending on track then it doesn't matter. However, in this case I really doubt it'll be an issue. We're dealing with suspension arms and I can't believe that you're going to want them twisting. That's the other thing to remember about this design, for all the aero benefits, who knows how the geometry will upset the tyre usage. Who knows - could be the silver bullet but we've been here with mac before!

[Blanchimont]

Why would they need to chage the ratio ? maybe they just rotated them
like this (blue instead of red)
http://www.servimg.com/image_preview.ph ... u=14795526

For me that would make an angle of 85° instead of 5° in relation to the reference plane as the largest axis of symmetry forms the angle with the RP.

"The major axis will be defined as the largest axis of symmetry of any such cross-section"

[Blackout]

Why would they need to chage the ratio ? maybe they just rotated them
like this (blue instead of red)
http://www.servimg.com/image_preview.ph ... u=14795526

For me that would make an angle of 85° instead of 5° in relation to the reference plane as the largest axis of symmetry forms the angle with the RP.

"The major axis will be defined as the largest axis of symmetry of any such cross-section"

Ok

[Shakeman]

Maybe the flaps twist into a more horizontal position at high speed.

That would be moveable aero.

But from what I remember of the flexi-wings if it passes the test then even if we can see them bending on track then it doesn't matter. However, in this case I really doubt it'll be an issue. We're dealing with suspension arms and I can't believe that you're going to want them twisting. That's the other thing to remember about this design, for all the aero benefits, who knows how the geometry will upset the tyre usage. Who knows - could be the silver bullet but we've been here with mac before!

I dunno about silver bullet, it looks like a pretty inefficient surface to present to the airflow. Maybe McLaren are testing the waters, seeing if others bite and maybe turn it 45 deg so it becomes a beam wing. Others will surely follow as it appears something that could easily be incorporated if necessary.

I would take the other view and think it's a bit of a desperate measure to fine rear downforce.

[tim|away]

Another view from above

[avatar]

The cross sections could look something like this, the symmetry line can point up or down 5°.

My guess (previous page) was concave top/bottom to begin with, but as I drew i switched to convex surfaces to give a wing profile....?

Here http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/wp-content/u ... 2014-2.jpg you can see the profile from above. My picture might exaggerate the real profile, but i think comes close to the real one.

That's a nice shot, I think it validates exactly what you described (in concept even if your dimensions are a bit more extreme) - a scoop profile rather than a wing.

[McG]

Maybe the flaps twist into a more horizontal position at high speed.

That would be moveable aero.

Maybe the wings twist backwards some degrees as the downforce puts pressure on the suspension. I think such a twisting motion would not be hard to build in to the suspension compression. This would also pass the FIA load tests because it's not actually flexing. There would be no way for this to be tested.

[avatar]

Are there load tests on the aero properties of suspension members/their shouding?

If not, surely there's scope to have the underside compress (rotate upwards, pivoting at frone with rear panel deforming to keep the section in tact) under load, to reduce drag/keep the downforce?

[NathanOlder]

Maybe the flaps twist into a more horizontal position at high speed.

That would be moveable aero.

Maybe the wings twist backwards some degrees as the downforce puts pressure on the suspension. I think such a twisting motion would not be hard to build in to the suspension compression. This would also pass the FIA load tests because it's not actually flexing. There would be no way for this to be tested.

But that has to be a movable aero device , which is illegal