Active rear wing - LotusTalk

dstevens · 10-06-2008, 06:40 PM

Split rear wing with computer controlled angle of attack.

http://aeromotions.com

10 seconds of the video answers most questions:

However, I'm not sure if I'd want it to fail half way around turn 8 at Willow Springs.

charliex · 10-06-2008, 06:42 PM

nifty, now couple that with the active magnetic suspension.

FLuXeXigeS · 10-06-2008, 06:44 PM

^^mitsubishi had the same concept back in 1995 they called it Active Aero, my step dad has it on his 1994 3000GT VR4

self adjusting front lip and rear spoiler + active suspension + 4wheels steering

Bavarian Motorist · 10-06-2008, 06:44 PM

Is it effective?

Mr. Know · 10-08-2008, 08:13 PM

Badarse!

Uncle Sam · 10-08-2008, 08:21 PM

It would seem that overall you are losing downforce when cornering with this set up. A change in the angle of attack for drag considerations on the straight, a la the Chapparal 2D, versus while cornering makes sense. But, the airflow disturbance without a central plate and more importantly the lack of half of the wing adding downforce in the corner would seem to make this less effective overall. My .02 cents.

Thomasio · 10-08-2008, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Sam

the lack of half of the wing adding downforce in the corner would seem to make this less effective overall. My .02 cents.

That is my thought as well. You can only incline the wing so far before the airflow will separate and the wing will stop making downforce... so the entire width of the wing, at a lower angle of attack, would produce more downforce.

Is there any benefit to the split wing?

Aedo · 10-08-2008, 09:20 PM

It seemed to me that it maintained downforce when cornering and braking and only feathered to low drag under full bore straightline acceleration (first few seconds of clip). I can only imagine the purpose of splitting the wing is to have differential downforce to reduce the chance of the inside wheel lifting on cornering. Would be great to see a direct comparison with a standard fixed wing and this wing on the same vehicle!

Thomasio · 10-08-2008, 09:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aedo

It seemed to me that it maintained downforce when cornering and braking and only feathered to low drag under full bore straightline acceleration (first few seconds of clip). I can only imagine the purpose of splitting the wing is to have differential downforce to reduce the chance of the inside wheel lifting on cornering. Would be great to see a direct comparison with a standard fixed wing and this wing on the same vehicle!

A differential downforce would be cool if you could create enough downforce with only 1/2 of the wing. It just seems to me that the 1/2 - wing would "stall" before it would create enough downforce to be effective. I can't tell from the video, but are they trying to create a rotational torque by bringing 1/2 - wing up and the other 1/2 - wing down?

Someone explain the 1/2 - wing to me...

steuspeed · 10-08-2008, 09:51 PM

Thunderhill data

AEROMOTIONS THE DATA

fishguy · 10-08-2008, 10:19 PM

looks like a giant turd to me.

didnt listen to the video, and i dont really want to either.

likely will sound like a giant turd also.

I think someone should buy it.

Noel · 10-09-2008, 01:25 AM

Old school adjust yourself to whatever angle for whatever required downforce. These spell rice all over em. Not to mention, which motorsports implements the usage of such "advanced" technology? None.

kverges · 10-09-2008, 07:16 AM

Jim Hall's Chapparals had active aero very similar in concept (the wing was not split, but changed angle of attack depending on braking vs acceleration). The concept was immediately banned. F1 used to allow active suspension, that was then used to control ride height for maximum aero (ground effect). Outlawed. Now F1 teams carefully monitor even the flex of their opponents' wings to prevent OUTLAWED active aero. Active aero works, but is not used in most motorsports since it is outlawed.

I am not saying this split wing works on a cone-dodging course and on a sedan to boot, but the concept of active aero is sound.

Do you think traction control does not work because it is not used in F1?

biodan · 10-09-2008, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steuspeed

Thunderhill data

AEROMOTIONS THE DATA

This is a great video - from a production point of view as was well as providing evidence that the split wing really works. Evidently, they did the average of multiple (3) runs too (but don't give the standard deviation).

Lap time without wing: 2:10.1
Lap time for Static wing: 2:09.2
Wing moving as a single unit: 2:08.4
Split wing: 2:07.7

The only questions are, how much and who really needs a 0.7 to 2.2 sec improvement in their laptimes? My guess its going to be at least $2k given the need for electronics and actuators. It goes on sale Oct 17 evidently.

CosmosMpower · 10-09-2008, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by biodan

This is a great video - from a production point of view as was well as providing evidence that the split wing really works. Evidently, they did the average of multiple (3) runs too (but don't give the standard deviation).

Lap time without wing: 2:10.1
Lap time for Static wing: 2:09.2
Wing moving as a single unit: 2:08.4
Split wing: 2:07.7

The only questions are, how much and who really needs a 0.7 to 2.2 sec improvement in their laptimes? My guess its going to be at least $2k given the need for electronics and actuators. It goes on sale Oct 17 evidently.

Uh 2 seconds at SCCA nationals is usually the difference between 1st and 20th.

biodan · 10-09-2008, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CosmosMpower

Uh 2 seconds at SCCA nationals is usually the difference between 1st and 20th.

Uhm, i was being facetious. Then again, is it legal?

Boondock Saint · 10-09-2008, 02:00 PM

VW Corrados have been doing that since 1989

xtn · 10-09-2008, 02:20 PM

The split wing idea is silly. It must be the product of somebody with an engineering mind but not enough sense.

Lets say, for purposes of discussion, that the full wing at full deflection, traveling at 100mph, produces 100lbs of down force. Doesn't matter if those numbers are way off; this is just for purposes of discussion. So lets assume that you're getting 50lbs of down force on each rear tire.

So why, oh good golly why, would you want to only get your 50lbs of down force on the inside tire? Why wouldn't you want the extra 50lbs of down force on both rear tires? Why wouldn't you want to increase the grip of both tires? Giving up down force on either side only reduces your maximum overall grip level.

I can only guess it's an ill guided attempt at reducing body roll? Body roll by itself doesn't hurt a dang thing. In fact Carol Smith advocates springing your car as softly as possible, providing for as much travel as possible, as much as you can without encountering bad behavior caused by geometry restraints, such as bump steer, undesirable camber curves, etc.

The times given for various configurations suggest the slit wing is the best, but I'm willing to buy a cheap steak dinner for anybody who can prove there were not other variables involved, or that indeed the seller of this wing didn't intentionally massage his numbers.

xtn

R'elise Me · 10-09-2008, 06:20 PM

Come on Fishy, give it a try. It's MIT material after all and there is supporting data, which may be BS. I've always thought an active wing would be the ticket for the NA Elise. I'd give it go if there was a satisfaction guarantee.

Noen · 10-09-2008, 06:58 PM

The active aero aspect of it is awesome. If they just did this as a single component that had realtime adjustment, they'd have a winning product for sure. But I'd like to see some real scientific data to back up the split wing concept.

I agree with xtn, the split wing seems ridiculous. I won't throw the idea out, but doing 4 runs with 4 options is not even close to enough to prove anything beyond placebo effect.

I can't see the data here at work, but without seeing 100 or more runs of each configuration on the same track, car, driver and conditions to show some real correlation trends, I have a real hard time believing it.

10-06-2008, 06:40 PM	#1 (permalink)
dstevens 2zz exorcism complete Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: California Posts: 248	Active rear wing Split rear wing with computer controlled angle of attack. http://aeromotions.com 10 seconds of the video answers most questions: However, I'm not sure if I'd want it to fail half way around turn 8 at Willow Springs. __________________ Honda powered Elise

10-06-2008, 06:42 PM	#2 (permalink)
charliex disproving HD MTBF daily Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Las Vegas , NV Posts: 8,190	nifty, now couple that with the active magnetic suspension. __________________ Black Exige S - http://goth.am 265 Mule / Elan M100 ECU Tuning, http://www.elisetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39660

10-06-2008, 06:44 PM	#3 (permalink)
FLuXeXigeS ...disappearing posts... Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: SoCal/AZ/NV Posts: 4,281	^^mitsubishi had the same concept back in 1995 they called it Active Aero, my step dad has it on his 1994 3000GT VR4 self adjusting front lip and rear spoiler + active suspension + 4wheels steering __________________ -Coi-'07 AR Exige S+Gotham, Von Hep, corner balanced&tuned SACHS, 6k HID, JVC KD-NX5000, Alpine 4ch. amp, JL stealth box, s111 rear towhook and harness bar, Starshield, TG4 1/4 turn fasteners, SS brake lines, bling bling eng bay, painted calipers, TD 1.2 wheels w/ Toyo R888, Safecraft harnesses, DRL delete, s111 CRD mount. add me: www.myspace.com/kandyredcoi & lotuscar.ning.com/profile/KandyRedCoi

10-06-2008, 06:44 PM	#4 (permalink)
Bavarian Motorist Live to Drive Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Rye, NY Posts: 8,240	Is it effective? __________________ Driving a Lotus Exige with sticky... performance tires on icy roads or in standing water is about as much fun as walking a high wire treated with WD-40 - Car & Driver BWR supercharged... I suppose I "got the power" now??

10-08-2008, 08:13 PM	#5 (permalink)
Mr. Know British by extrapolation Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Marin, California Posts: 2,091 Images: 5	Badarse! __________________ 07 Magnetic Blue Exige S

10-08-2008, 08:21 PM	#6 (permalink)
Uncle Sam Registered User Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Rockville, Maryland Posts: 515 Images: 2	It would seem that overall you are losing downforce when cornering with this set up. A change in the angle of attack for drag considerations on the straight, a la the Chapparal 2D, versus while cornering makes sense. But, the airflow disturbance without a central plate and more importantly the lack of half of the wing adding downforce in the corner would seem to make this less effective overall. My .02 cents.

10-08-2008, 09:20 PM	#8 (permalink)
Aedo anglophile in exile Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Oz Posts: 1,404 Images: 50	It seemed to me that it maintained downforce when cornering and braking and only feathered to low drag under full bore straightline acceleration (first few seconds of clip). I can only imagine the purpose of splitting the wing is to have differential downforce to reduce the chance of the inside wheel lifting on cornering. Would be great to see a direct comparison with a standard fixed wing and this wing on the same vehicle!

10-08-2008, 09:51 PM	#10 (permalink)
steuspeed Registered User Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 818	Thunderhill data AEROMOTIONS THE DATA

10-08-2008, 10:19 PM	#11 (permalink)
fishguy BLAND Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 4,108 Images: 1	looks like a giant turd to me. didnt listen to the video, and i dont really want to either. likely will sound like a giant turd also. I think someone should buy it. __________________ 1986 Swift DB-1 1987 Porsche Spec 944

10-09-2008, 01:25 AM	#12 (permalink)
Noel Weiß Stoßtruppen Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: 33.87°S 151.21°E Car: ロータス MKII エキシージ Type: S280 2ZZ-GE Posts: 128	Old school adjust yourself to whatever angle for whatever required downforce. These spell rice all over em. Not to mention, which motorsports implements the usage of such "advanced" technology? None.

10-09-2008, 07:16 AM	#13 (permalink)
kverges Registered User Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Dallas Posts: 696	Jim Hall's Chapparals had active aero very similar in concept (the wing was not split, but changed angle of attack depending on braking vs acceleration). The concept was immediately banned. F1 used to allow active suspension, that was then used to control ride height for maximum aero (ground effect). Outlawed. Now F1 teams carefully monitor even the flex of their opponents' wings to prevent OUTLAWED active aero. Active aero works, but is not used in most motorsports since it is outlawed. I am not saying this split wing works on a cone-dodging course and on a sedan to boot, but the concept of active aero is sound. Do you think traction control does not work because it is not used in F1?

10-09-2008, 02:00 PM	#17 (permalink)
Boondock Saint Crotch rocket addict Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Burbank, CA Posts: 694	VW Corrados have been doing that since 1989 __________________ Youth is not entirely a time of life; it is a state of mind. Nobody grows old by merely living a number of years. People grow old by deserting their ideals. You are as young as your faith, as old as your doubt; as young as your self-confidence, as old as your fear; as young as your hope, as old as your despair. - Douglas MacArthur

10-09-2008, 02:20 PM	#18 (permalink)
xtn McLareghini Bugatterrari Join Date: May 2006 Location: Texas Posts: 5,811	The split wing idea is silly. It must be the product of somebody with an engineering mind but not enough sense. Lets say, for purposes of discussion, that the full wing at full deflection, traveling at 100mph, produces 100lbs of down force. Doesn't matter if those numbers are way off; this is just for purposes of discussion. So lets assume that you're getting 50lbs of down force on each rear tire. So why, oh good golly why, would you want to only get your 50lbs of down force on the inside tire? Why wouldn't you want the extra 50lbs of down force on both rear tires? Why wouldn't you want to increase the grip of both tires? Giving up down force on either side only reduces your maximum overall grip level. I can only guess it's an ill guided attempt at reducing body roll? Body roll by itself doesn't hurt a dang thing. In fact Carol Smith advocates springing your car as softly as possible, providing for as much travel as possible, as much as you can without encountering bad behavior caused by geometry restraints, such as bump steer, undesirable camber curves, etc. The times given for various configurations suggest the slit wing is the best, but I'm willing to buy a cheap steak dinner for anybody who can prove there were not other variables involved, or that indeed the seller of this wing didn't intentionally massage his numbers. xtn __________________ 2006 McLareghini Bugatterrari, Storm Titanium... <mods> installed: air horn, Scroth 4-point ASM harnesses, Sector111 halon extinguisher and mounting bracket, Von Hep exhaust and rear panel delete, Pagid brake pads, red Volks CE28n wheels, Toyo RA-1 tires, Nitron SA coilovers, Sector111 (WorksBell) quick-disconnect steering wheel kit. awaiting installation: Scroth "pull-up" lap belts, Sector111 RTD Brace, Tony's heater bypass mod, and dropped steering rack mounting plates. </mods> Last edited by xtn : 10-09-2008 at 02:33 PM.

10-09-2008, 06:20 PM	#19 (permalink)
R'elise Me My other car's a mtn bike Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: USA Posts: 1,091	Come on Fishy, give it a try. It's MIT material after all and there is supporting data, which may be BS. I've always thought an active wing would be the ticket for the NA Elise. I'd give it go if there was a satisfaction guarantee. __________________ Sometimes you have to go in circles to move forward. 05 Elise

10-09-2008, 06:58 PM	#20 (permalink)
Noen Registered User Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 196	The active aero aspect of it is awesome. If they just did this as a single component that had realtime adjustment, they'd have a winning product for sure. But I'd like to see some real scientific data to back up the split wing concept. I agree with xtn, the split wing seems ridiculous. I won't throw the idea out, but doing 4 runs with 4 options is not even close to enough to prove anything beyond placebo effect. I can't see the data here at work, but without seeing 100 or more runs of each configuration on the same track, car, driver and conditions to show some real correlation trends, I have a real hard time believing it.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode