Renault's new midwing

[rumpelstulskin]

the french certainly know aesthetics

[inspectah]

Strange that the wings are so close to each other and vertically on so much the same level. You would think that the first wing wouldn't function properly, because all the air rising up underneath it is disturbed by the wing behind it, and that the second wouldn't work because the other is directly in front of it. Wouldn't a wing the length of the two have done the deal better? I don't know 'cos I'm not an aerodynamics expert...

[guest]

"not an expert", no --- sherlock

[Irvingthien]

Interesting...
Probably works like the Ferrari air box wings...but raised rear end may mean down force generating is the purpose.

[West]

"not an expert", no --- sherlock

You're not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer, either...

The camber on the wings suggest some downforce is made up there, and the positioning of the second wing acts as if it is "extending" the front wing, adding a little more camber and span. There is probably less disturbance using two wings or flaps as opposed to one big wing.

[Reca]

In case of two airfoils in tandem, the presence of the rear airfoil (2) improves a lot the Cl of the front airfoil (1) inducing a peak of velocity on the nose of 1.
2 on the contrary results a bit penalized by the influence of 1 and that’s one of the reasons usually the angle of attack of 2 is larger (as in the typical wing + flap setup). In the particular case of the Renault design anyway the second wing span isn’t as large as the first one, and actually also the aspect ratio of both wing is quite small so the 3D effects of the tip vortex must be considered.

[Guest]

I can barely notice the difference in angle of attack in both wings. It just looks like hte 2nd one is higher than the 1st one, and both wings having similar dimensions.

[mclarenf1gtr]

for one the second wing helps for less weight in the rear instead of one big wing u get two small wings and they are both shaped th same way but the rear one is higher so tht the air when it goes under the first one helps the wind.air travel without lettin the car have a big ass wing making it hard to corner and making it heavier

[West]

for one the second wing helps for less weight in the rear instead of one big wing u get two small wings and they are both shaped th same way but the rear one is higher so tht the air when it goes under the first one helps the wind.air travel without lettin the car have a big ass wing making it hard to corner and making it heavier

90% of that post did not make sense to me.

[Monstrobolaxa]

only 90%??

[chet]

You say why are there two elements which clearly produce downforce?

Well you can ask the same question with the rear wing, why are there 2 elements, wouldnt 1 be better? (rhetorical question)

NO because of the angle of attack (and the wing might stall), by having the two engine cover elements Renault can produce more downforce as they do not have to angle it so the wing(s) looses downforce

[Guest]

I've seen other pictures of it and the second wing is placed lower than the first one!

[inspectah]

it's true, the wings have at least 10 cm height difference, it just looked from this picture that the second wing was exactly behind the other

[inspectah]

well, not exactly ten cm(about 8 inch.), but a lot.
Also i think it was the other way around, the first wing was lower.

[Micky]

Doesn't the first wing just condition the air for the second so that optimum downforce and stability is achieved.