McLaren MP4/20 and those strange airbox horns

[f1artwork]

Does anyone have any educated guesses what those wings do? I am a technical illustrator commissioned to explain how these damned things work but noone seems to know that much.
Are they to merely direct airflow back downwards slightly towards the rear wing making it more effective? They don't look to be at enough of an angle to produce any downforce as far as I can see and the vertical element, is that to reduce vorticices forming as air spils from one suface to the other? Rather like the little vertical bits at the ends of the wings on some larger commercial jets? HELP!!!

[DaveKillens]

I'd like to add my opinion, but please remember I'm not a trained engineer or aerodynamicist.
Endplates. They exist to control the flow of air from a high pressure zone to a low. Imagine an aircraft wing, one side has a lower pressure than the other. A good viisualization is the front wings, with their endplates. The bottom of the wing is a lower pressure area than the top. So, right at the end of the wing, the high pressure air wants to go to the low pressure area. So at the ends of the wings, there would be a vortex. An endplate captures the energy from this flow of air, and captures it. In airliners, those are the little vertical plates at the ends of the wings, They capture the energyy, and turn it into lift and reduiced drag.
So if you examine the weird wing thingies on the sides of the airbox, a slight endplate is formed at the (approximately) 45 degree junction. If the top of the wing is high pressure and the bottom low, then this "kink" reduces any vortex affect at this point. I would have to think the vertical elements are there to straighten the ariflow, and to add a wicked visual element. The wings are almost directly behind this wing, so it has probably straigntens out the air before it gets to the rear wings.
Transformers....... kids will love them.

[West]

http://www.formula1.com states that the upper part of the viking wings guides air towards the rear wing more effectively, while the bottom helps guide airflow around the sidepods and airbox better... but i dunno

[ZE.FT]

I still think that this device straightens the vortices caused by mirrors,driver helmet or generally spoken the cockpit area.
We should pay attention to the fact that the lateral pieces are slight "V" shaped wings with the endplates which have the bigger part towards the top of the "wings". So the vortices on top ,on the high pressure zone are bigger than the on the low pressure zone? These "endplates" are really troubling me.
Or again are these plates again "only" plates compareable with barge boards regarding their effect and not endplates compareable with "real" wing endplates?
Any idea?

[f1artwork]

Been doing some web trawling and wondered about this...
The Gulfstream II private jet has what are called "blended winglets" that reduce vortices and hence drag ON AN AIRCRAFT. Was Adrian Newey looking out of the window on the way back from a flyaway GP at the wing tips and thought "..Hey, wait a minute, that'd look really cool on the MP4/20!
Joking aside, Could it be a combo of all these things? Horizontal element captures and directs air to wing, vertical plane cleans up turbulent flow from around helmet/airbox as well as reducing vortices -- which can be larger at slower speeds I'm told -- interfering with rear wing efficiency?

Still not doing them much good on track though.

[mep]

Hi f1artwork
You are an technical illustrator ?
What is exactly your job?
Where do you work? FIA maybe?
Do you make drawings of formula1 cars or parts?
I'm a student but in my freetime I make drawings of the MP4-20
because I plan to build a 1:4,5 Model. I have made very good cad drawings of the car with the help of some pictures.
If you have also some interesting pictures or drawings, maybe of some details, we could exchance our work.
Maybe you are interested.
manuel_gr@gmx.de


For those horns mounted on the MP4-20, I wouldn't think in such difficult ways. Perhaps they are simply there to produce a litle extra downforce like many other smal parts appearing due to the new regulations.
But this wing is mounted on a very good position, because it's in clean air.
Remember the Y-wings (tower wings).
I can't imagine they are only there to clean the airflow, because the airflow in this area is clean and gets disturbed by such a wing.

[ZE.FT]

For those horns mounted on the MP4-20, I wouldn't think in such difficult ways. Perhaps they are simply there to produce a litle extra downforce like many other smal parts appearing due to the new regulations.
But this wing is mounted on a very good position, because it's in clean air.
Remember the Y-wings (tower wings).
I can't imagine they are only there to clean the airflow, because the airflow in this area is clean and gets disturbed by such a wing.

Here I am not with you. To name this device as a wing it must have a camber plus endplates which seperate vortices on top and on the bottom of the wing ends. If an aero device has no angle of attack and I cant see any angle of attack plus the plates at the end cover only the high pressure zone on top there then it is not a wing to create downforce.
As you say if the air there would be clean no such device would be needed
which just would disturb clean air entry to the back wing.

[f1artwork]

I thought about the lack of attack on these airbox wings... there is none in relation to the dirction of travel but there is interms of the air hitting them, it is on an upward trajectory after hitting the sidepods/cockpit area helmet etc?

[bernard]

Hi f1artwork
For those horns mounted on the MP4-20, I wouldn't think in such difficult ways. Perhaps they are simply there to produce a litle extra downforce like many other smal parts appearing due to the new regulations.
But this wing is mounted on a very good position, because it's in clean air.
Remember the Y-wings (tower wings).
I can't imagine they are only there to clean the airflow, because the airflow in this area is clean and gets disturbed by such a wing.

It's hard for a vertical wing to produce downforce.

[kilcoo316]

Hmmm.... its possible that the horizontal element cleans up air between itself and the top of sidepod - but the vertical fence acts differently.

As most of you know, wingtip vortices are caused by pressure differentials between the two surfaces, which is caused by the camber of the aerofoil shape. Now, if the vertical section were to be producing "lift" towards the car's centreline, the trailing wingtip vortex from the two vertical parts would produce a downwash over the centre section of the rear wing, effectively increasing (decreasing in aeroplane terms) its angle of attack, and resulting in more downforce. Incidentally, the upwash at the "outside" may reduce downforce at the rear wing ends - however, since this is not an efficient region to generate downforce it may not matter so much.

[DaveKillens]

There is a description of these devices at http://www.formula1.com/insight/technic ... /5/90.html
They describe the function as adding soem downforce, and splitting the air into two layers, on down for the sidepods, and the other for the rear wings.

[flyin Kiwi]

Hey, been browsing for a while, first time post. I generally agree that these strange wings on the Mclaren probably mostly smooth airflow towards the rear of the car to improve efficiency. I also agree with f1artworks comments about relative airflow also, so some lift may be produced. As to bernards comments about vertical wings not being able to produce downforce, maybe they are to produce side force during turning?!
rumour has it many F1 teams have been experimenting with transient aero and if you were to produce a side force you would want it to be near the cars yaw centre. just a thought.

[West]

In all cases, McLaren isn't as fast as many people thought they'd be....

[Inside Line]

[quote="flyin Kiwi" As to bernards comments about vertical wings not being able to produce downforce, maybe they are to produce side force during turning?!
rumour has it many F1 teams have been experimenting with transient aero and if you were to produce a side force you would want it to be near the cars yaw centre. just a thought.[/quote]

i agree, kiwi.
end plates and other aero devices also do this and increase turning stability and reduce the sidewall loads on the tires. the closer to the yaw center the better but that's a huge equation to determine where the yaw center is during various conditions.

pip

[mep]

bernard wrote: It's hard for a vertical wing to produce downforce.

I thougt it's clear that I mean the horizontal element bernard.

It's not so hard as you think. Downforce does not only depend on the angle of attac of the wing.
It also depends on the wing profile. And I know some airplaine profiles wich produce lift (in this case downforce) at zero angle of attac.
They even produce lift at a negative angle.
For example the Clark Y-profile. It produces lift at an angle of -4°!

In this position the angle of attac can not bee very high because of the rear wing. The air would be guided ouver the wing.

For the vertical element I thing it acts like a winglet.
It increases the span (indirectly). And I think it has something to do with the regulations. The spann of the wing is limited by the regulations, so McLaren mounted these Winglets.
To make the wing work more efficient.
And it's also clear that they reduce vortices as winglets do so.