Zynerji wrote: ↑
Thu Oct 14, 2021 12:47 am
dans79 wrote: ↑
Thu Oct 14, 2021 12:34 am
Zynerji wrote: ↑
Thu Oct 14, 2021 12:29 am
I wonder why they chose to let it flex so much if it's so terribly destructive to the wing performance...
Merc and RBR have different aero philosophies, hence why copying one concept from an opposing car rarely works.
You must integrate that concept into your overall aero philosophy. Making changes at the front of a car is more work than further back, because what you do upfront effects everything behind!
So, it's smart for Merc. But dumb for RBR?
How do you know that implementing the bendy wing wouldn't solve some of RBR's issues?
What dans79 is saying is correct.
The FW serves 2 main purposes: 1) a flow conditioner/vortex orchestrator for everything downstream (plus directing outwash from downstream components); 2) a downforce-generating aero surface.
When you start to change how that wing operates, you change the car’s operating window fairly significantly.
That’s why you’ve seen Mercedes trial their new FW for 2 race weekends now without actually running it. Part of the reason is because the new design is a bit of a philosophy change from their current design (and a step toward the RB design with respect to the uppermost elements that have been reshaped).
I think RBR’s current FW spec is excellent, and the sophistication level of the upper flap contouring is very well done. As Merc are continuing to raise their car’s ride height, they’ve now introduced a RB-inspired FW to match that choice. But they haven’t raced it yet, as I’ve mentioned.
I anticipate you would get more drag reduction from how/where you connect the flaps to the end plate (closer to the foot plate or running the full span of the end plate) than trying to chase some kind of bendy motion that’s likely wholly incidental to the design of the wing.