Racecar wings -- Crude in a refined way

Despite the use of wind tunnels and computational fluid dynamics, the draconian rules restictions over the years have resulted in racecar remaining fundamentally a crude way to generate downforce. Airliner wings with their variable geometry through the use of leading edge slats, spoilers, and flaps remain vastly more sophisticated than even the latest F1 wings.

Agreed, but aren't airplane wings fitted with flaps to allow extra lift under take-off conditions.

How would the reverse be appropriate? (assuming racecars don't need lift)

True- but It would be much more fun to get rid of the wings completely and rely more on mechanics for a good grip- nice wide sticky tyres should do it!

The F1 rules could easily be changed to allow variable geometry wings, favouring those teams with their own wind tunnels and bigger research budgets- same with electronic aids such as traction control etc...etc.

The formula's rules don't allow it,

so there.

Originally posted by Sparky

Agreed, but aren't airplane wings fitted with flaps to allow extra lift under take-off conditions.

How would the reverse be appropriate? (assuming racecars don't need lift)



Slightly out of context, but aren't those little automatic roof flaps on NASCARS a good example of adjustable aerodynamic aids at work?

After years of hand-wringing about cars that flip over when they spin at superspeedways, these neat little devices have eliminated perhaps 70% of NASCAR rollovers in the last decade.

Again, agreed Tim, but they're not adjustable in the way that a 'planes' flaps are. They respond to air pressure, without any driver input. Very well I might add!

I suspect Franklin was suggesting a driver-controlled device, whereby extra downforce could be applied when deemed necessary.

Yes, Sparky, I concur. I simply went down a train of thought trying to connect flaps with negative lift. I knew it was out of context!

Some years ago this was tried in a simple way on a superkart
basic setup with two position and adjusted by a hand lever,high downforce for corners and low downforce down the straights,adjustable wings(while in motion)are now banned.with todays electronics it would be a lot easier to make one that adjusts its self, dependent on speed,g forces etc.

The only major racing series I know that employ active wing dtymanics is the World of Otlaws sprinters. The large wing can be adjusted fore and aft to increase traction at that end of the car. I have seen some drivers actually move it for each corner during races to get more traction depending on the situation. Every other major sanctioning body has disallowed moveable wing elements because of cost and development issues. Drag racing doesn't allow it either.

Some of the very first use of wings on racecars included variable setups. Such as wings that would increase attack angle when brakes were applied, or wings that moved with suspension movement.

The problem with those was, when something failed, the changes in the handling of the car were immediate, uncontrolable and often catastrophic. It didnt take FIA, USAC and others long to figure out that safety demanded fixed wings.

Years after Art Arfons had gone 600 mph with a high-mounted self-adjusting wing, those genius Formula One constructors were putting their wings on top of spindly struts that were collapsing before the cars even got to 200 mph.

And since nobody in this thread seems to have figured it out, I'll point out that racecar wings use flaps RIGHT NOW. Except since unlike airplane wings they're fixed flaps, the flaps can't be retracted to reduce drag once the wing gets up to high speed.

Originally posted by Franklin
And since nobody in this thread seems to have figured it out, I'll point out that racecar wings use flaps RIGHT NOW. Except since unlike airplane wings they're fixed flaps, the flaps can't be retracted to reduce drag once the wing gets up to high speed.

I think we've already discussed the possibly disastrous effects of a moveable aerodynamic device in motor racing. So your point is a little er pointless?

"Agreed, but aren't airplane wings fitted with flaps to allow extra lift under take-off conditions. How would the reverse be appropriate? (assuming racecars don't need lift)"

When Sparky doesn't seem to have a clue about flaps (or wings in general) I'd say its very much to the point.

Well Franklin, since you managed to offend everyone because we are not at your genius level of mechanical engineering, I'll just say that if a "flap" doesnt move, then it really isnt a "flap", is it?

A flap is a flap.

When flaps on airplanes are performing their function of increasing lift they're left in the position selected by the pilot, so like the flaps on a racecar wing they're not moving either.

A big difference between airplane wings and racecar wings is on airplane when you need more flap you just set the selector to a different position. On a racecar if you need more flap you have to bolt on a whole new wing.

Aircraft use variable geometry leading and trailing edge flaps. The flaps are computer or pilot controlled to give the desired amount of lift. Most commercial and all military aricraft use constantly variable flap and flaperons. Race cars do not have this luxury because the rules will not allow it, so they used fixed trailing flaps called Gurney Flaps or wickerbills in the sprint car arena. This acts as the flap on an aircraft wing. They increase drag but also increase lift, or downforce on a race car, by altering the chordal length of the wing element. In CART, F1 and the IRL, this is a thin piece that slides down the length of the wing edge in a thin channel. The teams have various widths of Gurney Flaps that alter the effective depth of the curvature of the wing by raising the rear height of the wing. This creates a higher negative pressure area and increses downforce. The IRL uses a mandatory Gurney Flap height to increase drag and give the drivers more downforce to overcome the speed on superspeedways.

These Gurney flaps are what Peter Mallet was talking about in an earlier thread.

No Frank - when a race car need mor downforce, the FLAP ANGLE is one of the adjustments - the mainplane stays in a fixed position.

Airliner wings are "more sophisticated" only in the sense that they can be adjusted automatically. An F1 wing is an extreme example of fluidics control sophistication with incredible refinement - much more refined than most airline wings. ( Read 'refined' as meaning 'taken to the nth degree')

Gurney Lips are not technically "flaps", as their function is a bit different.

MA, any wing that can't make any adjustments whatsoever to match whether the car is doing 50 mph or 200 mph is the essence of crude. You're confusing the "sophistication" of the wing with the sophistication of the methods (wind tunnel testing and computational fluid dynamics) used to design the wing.

"Airliner wings are "more sophisticated" only in the sense that they can be adjusted automatically. An F1 wing is an extreme example of fluidics control sophistication with incredible refinement - much more refined than most airline wings. ( Read 'refined' as meaning 'taken to the nth degree')"

Naaaa - the essence of crude is a sprinter wing !

wots all this about flaps?

cars have wings, which have ELEMENTS.
anything upto 13 elements in the rear F1 wing.
all adjustable to figures gained in the wind tunnel.

flaps are used on planes to only get a bit more lift and to cause drag to slow the thing down.
race cars DONT have flaps.

Franklin sometimes gets in a flap.....

THR:

Actually, when the last element is adjustable, it's called a flap. If non-adjustable, it's just the last element. But don't tell Frank that !!!