dont tink so as it doesnt look pretty usefull imo, it might be useful for drag reduction but its execution on f1 wings is way different with the bigger chords f1 wing uses.
If they manage to tune the shape to achieve Reynolds number in the range of 5x10^5 at desired top speed, drag reduces suddenly due to highly turbulent wake region forming behind.
Makes sense. Flow around the hemispheres stays attached up to a certain speed & the gurney flap functions normally. Beyond a certain speed, flow cannot stay attached around they entire hemisphere, they then stall & reduce the effectiveness of the gurney flap.
So not only does it reduce drag, it will also stall at high speeds?
siskue2005 wrote:So not only does it reduce drag, it will also stall at high speeds?
Not quite sure about this, but it would move trailing edge's stagnation point forward, reducing longitudal circulation (downforce) and maybe inducing sooner then normal flow separation on sucking side of the wing (partiall stall). Only wind tunel will tell.
There is no free lunch, so before you arrive at the optimal speed, you have to pay added drag (in comparision to "normal" flap) penalty, but this transition area is relatively narrow.
wesley123 wrote:dont tink so as it doesnt look pretty usefull imo, it might be useful for drag reduction but its execution on f1 wings is way different with the bigger chords f1 wing uses.
Is there a limit on the cross sectional area of the wing profiles? I am wondering if the bulges add too much.
I may be mistaken, but as far as I know, all the small cuts that these bubbles produce in the plane where the wing is will create more boundary layers.
Hydrodynamically, and thermally, the more boundary layers you have, the greater the pressure loss.
If you produce pressure loss you will create more turbulent flow around the "balls". These turbulent flow reduces considerably drag as marekk showed for internalt flow with the Reynold's number.
Also, the greater the Reynold's number, the further you are form the laminar regime. At turbulent regime you will have less drag. Moreover, the Reynolds number is function of the speed of the fluid, and therefore, the speed of the flow around the "balls" is greater.
Summing up, I believe that you would achieve drag reduction, and there is a slight chance that somehow, with higher Re numbers, you will have greater speeds at the top (and thus, more downforce).
By the look of things, the idea was motivated by the mandatory 20 mm gurney rule in LeMans.
Peugeot brought their own interpretation of the idea for the race.
"Make the suspension adjustable and they will adjust it wrong ......
look what they can do to a carburetor in just a few moments of stupidity with a screwdriver." - Colin Chapman
“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” - Leonardo da Vinci
The point is to decrease the drag induced by the mandatory gurney. The only way to tilt it back like that, is to shape the top of the wingsurface somewhat non-standard :).
