[/quote]
Also, effectively stalling ~30cm of the wing seems rather a lot for such a smooth transition between the narrow pylon and the wing (LMP was a lot more crude in that respect).mep wrote:I thought the same but to be honest they would not place it there if it causes that effect.
the pictures don't lie. That is a text book example of airflow disruption over a wing. Stez is rightmep wrote:I thought the same but to be honest they would not place it there if it causes that effect.
I would say the Lotus system would be crude compared to the LMP unit. No reason the LMP unit would not be the correct foil shape for the application, where we think there are slots in the Lotus system.superdread wrote:...for such a smooth transition between the narrow pylon and the wing (LMP was a lot more crude in that respect).
With the slight difference that here we have a flow blowing the detachment volume increasing the effectively stalled wing area.flynfrog wrote:the pictures don't lie. That is a text book example of airflow disruption over a wing. Stez is rightmep wrote:I thought the same but to be honest they would not place it there if it causes that effect.
I meant the mounting to the wing, LMP has variable ones that after all carry a lot of load as well.hardingfv32 wrote: I would say the Lotus system would be crude compared to the LMP unit. No reason the LMP unit would not be the correct foil shape for the application, where we think there are slots in the Lotus system.
Brian
You are absolutely right about the cause of the V shape.stez90 wrote:that V-shape is the area affected by turbolence/wakes from the vertical blade (and generally by wing mounts in other racing series).. It decreases the efficency of the wing and that's why LMP cars switched to "swan neck" rear wings.
My though is that Lotus might be using a flow to correct this V-shaped zone caused by the strut. You have low downforce (less drag?) when there is no blowing of the strut and regain downforce when allow blowing of the strut.superdread wrote:With the slight difference that here we have a flow blowing the detachment volume increasing the effectively stalled wing area.
maybe he is maybe not - there are not many "absolutes" in life (he (stez90) does made some good and partly valid points, but perhaps it is not the full story)hardingfv32 wrote:You are absolutely right about the cause of the V shape.stez90 wrote:that V-shape is the area affected by turbolence/wakes from the vertical blade (and generally by wing mounts in other racing series).. It decreases the efficency of the wing and that's why LMP cars switched to "swan neck" rear wings.
different air speeds could explain the different Vees. You can see a small support in the STR wing causing the stalled area.gato azul wrote:Snip
It's last years McLaren (quirky sidepods). I think the pattern rather depends on the two v-cutouts at the ridges. I think these are to reduce drag, here used on the main element so they only come to full effect with DRS open.hardingfv32 wrote:In the top photo,STR ?, look at the size of the V-section on the second (red) element formed around the vertical fence. Why put the fence there if this is the flow pattern you are going to get? This has to be what they wanted for a flow pattern. What would possible be good about such a pattern?
How does a fence cause such a flow pattern?
Brian
Do you contend that Lotus affixed a "strut" to the main plane of the rear wing just so they could fix the flow problem caused affixing a "strut" to the main plane of the rear wing with blown slots on the "strut" they just affixed to the main plane of the rear wing?hardingfv32 wrote:[...]
Can anything be done to improve the flow where the strut comes into contact with the bottom of the wing? Could that be what the slots do in the lotus strut?
Brian
