New wings ready to be tested.
Just a few photos of our new wing package
New wings ready to be tested.
Dauntless?
Nice work! Car looks great, looking forward to your updates. I'd like to try that set up!
Yes, Dauntless front wing
Looks wicked, Jon!Originally Posted by ASRF1000
Stan Clayton
Stohr Cars
FA wings
Hi Stan;
This car looks, and likely, performs great! However, I have not yet converted to the FB platform, still being stuck with trying to make progress in FA. A few years ago you had a good set-up for a Ralt-41. Are you still working with those cars and are you available to consult and perhaps build a wing set-up? Please see attached my current ride (ex-Sunier). Short of putting Rennie in it, I need all of the help that I can get.
Thanks and let me know,
Chas
Charles C. Duncan
Swift 016a #98/99
Chas,
Yes we definitely still work with the Ralt 41, and are available for consultation on whatever you might need there. I've not driven in some time (have my hands full with a 6-month old at home), but last year we went through most of the due dilligence for what it would take to completely revamp the aerodynamic package of the Ralt, including new wing designs, nose, sidepods and undertray.
Give me a call or email if you'd like to discuss details.
Cheers,
Rennie
520 / 907.9872
rennie@dauntlessracing.com
Out of curiosity, what is the theory behind raising the ends of the wing? I thought part of the point of a high nose was to get more wing more ground effect...
I'll let Rennie answer this one, as he designed the wing, but part of the theory of the raised nose is to give more air to the front splitter under the cockpit.
The outboard ends of the wing are raised primarily to reduce pitch sensitivity, which we considered to be a high priority for FB and FC given the relatively low spring rates and mechanical grip-oriented setups typically used on these cars in Club racing. There was a nice side benefit as well, greater design flexibility for the endplates, which are critical to wing (and overall car) performance.
The wing still operates in ground effect - max clearance at speed is 3-4", which still puts you in the range of 0.5c (without flaps) to 0.2c (with flaps). Well within the rising zone for ground effect, but it completely avoids the setup danger zone of extremely low wing clearance.
Cheers,
Rennie
My mustache wings suffers no ill effects due to chassis pitch.
Sounds to me like raised wing ends became popular due to the fact F1 uses wings of that shape. Of course their wings have adapted such a shape due to regulation rather than performance perimeters.
Chris Livengood, enjoying underpriced ferrous whizzy bits that I hacked out in my tool shed since 1999.
Hi Chris,
You've still got pitch sensitivity, though not nearly to the degree that your high-nose brethren do. Your moustache wings are raised in the center as opposed to raised at the ends - a slightly different solution to the same problem, but remarkably similar in strategy. It alleviates boundary layer contention with the ground at extremely low ride heights by raising portions of the wing. I could be wrong on this, but I think even the lowest part of the moustache wings tend to have higher ground clearance than the straight full-span wings, at least going by photos of the cars I see on the F2000 series website. No real rocket science involved - we just happen to raise the ends rather than the center.
Meh, I don't especially buy into the F1 hype - though I admit to finding the shape pleasing to the eye, I find that my experience with pitch sensitive full-span stick-straight wings during my time in Atlantics was a far bigger design influence.
Cheers,
Rennie
Isn't pitch sensitivity related more so to the air beneath the car?
Chris Livengood, enjoying underpriced ferrous whizzy bits that I hacked out in my tool shed since 1999.
Rennie; Will these wings be available for sale? Just curious. Really nice looking work. Thanks!
Yes, that's what we've been discussing. In particular on a formula car, air flow under the front wing, and air flow under the diffuser transition.
Cheers,
Rennie
Straight wings
Actually, since we have supplied many of the F2000 Pro wings (from the standard Zetec to a variety of prototypes inc. the last two race winners) we actually find our straight wings in this class seem pretty insensitive to pitch changes. As little wing as these guys run on the rear it all seems to be about lift/drag on the front. Ideally we'd make a composite nose wing high in the center (like the Dallara or Tatuus of a few years ago) but that does not make economic sense compared with a straight aluminum one. Remenber F2000 has a tighter splitter rule so not blocking the air in the center seems to be more important than FB. Maybe FA has more to do with tunnel entry and more downforce
http://roadracingoverstock.com/wings.aspx
Phil
Bill - yes, they are currently available for sale. Please contact either me or Stan for more details.
http://www.dauntlessracing.com/About.aspx
Don't mean to ruffle any feathers with regard to pitch sensitivity, but the effect is real and present. Of course, the formula community has been concocting 20 years worth of mitigation strategies for the pitch sensitivity of full-span underslung wings and general ground effects: raised center, raised ends, raised entire assemblies, stiff springs, more sophisticated damping, mass dampers, reflexed airfoils... the list does tend to go on.
Straight wings are perfectly serviceable, especially with low downforce settings - that being said, we're attempting to move the bar a bit with respect to how much usable downforce is generated within a low-drag envelope!
Cheers,
Rennie
thanks for the explanation!
No one ever seems to want to give their numbers of how much better their wings are than anyone else's or how they arrived at their numbers. It is pretty clear from results that there is no must have wing package.
I don't think Phil ever said pitch sensitivity didn't exist, just that their wings were robust to pitch. I doubt that anyone is going to make a difference in their results with if they suddenly get a wing with less pitch dependence.
Front wings are a very consumable piece of the car, second only to tires. Some of the prices are scary since I wouldn't want to show up for a double weekend without at least two, preferably three.
Chris L, love the signature
How many people have campaigned the full Dauntless wing setup yet in FC or F2000? I know Keith Roberts ran the rear wing, and Rob Nicholas had the full setup at VIR, but he blew his engine pretty early in the weekend. I'm curious to see how well it does on track.
buttonwillow double national had a FC running pretty fast !
not sure if it was running unlocked zetec ecu and motor.. but it was moving along fairly fast.
Josh,
Only a few so far. Other than the folks you mentioned, Mike Manning has been carrying on with testing duties for us on the West coast, running his RF01 with our prototype parts in FC. That includes the front + rear wing assemblies, and our new diffuser design as well. We're very pleased with the results so far, and learning a lot along the way.
Rob's misadventures at VIR were a bummer, he only got a couple of laps in with the new front wing assembly, but we're looking forward to seeing him back in action at Watkins Glen. There will be another FC competitor shortly sporting our wings as well.
That would have been Mike Manning at BW with our wings - Pinto motor. Unfortunately the prototype front wing mounts developed stress cracks from the bumps at BW; they cobbled together a reinforced mount, but felt that it was too fragile to push 100%. We've revised the design since then to make it all stronger.
Cheers,
Rennie
Thanks Phil. This lends to the point of my previous and rhetorical question.
Wren, thanks.
Chris Livengood, enjoying underpriced ferrous whizzy bits that I hacked out in my tool shed since 1999.
Pics of the new diffuser?
Is it the one that has been on your website?
I'm going to venture slightly off-topic. Would Mr. Livengood be kind enough to spell his name phonetically?
Is it Lye-ven-good? Liv-en-good? Lee-ven-good? At Atlanta there were 4 or 5 people standing there in the pits trying to figure this out.
Slightly off topic-
Rennie,
Mike Manning as in Mike Manning Karting? If so, Dad or Son?
Dauntless FB/FC diffuser photos.
Last edited by Stan Clayton; 09.18.13 at 7:55 AM.
Stan Clayton
Stohr Cars
Lye-ven-good would be how the family has traditionally said it. Friends of mine have over many years traditionally called me personally liv-en-good. At this point I am cool with you saying in whatever fashion makes you most happy. Finally, the traditional German pronunciation is similar to your third phonetic spelling.
Chris Livengood, enjoying underpriced ferrous whizzy bits that I hacked out in my tool shed since 1999.
Okay, I will just go with Chris (pronounced Kriss).
Looks good for an FB. Do you have any plans to build an FC legal version?
The design complies to both FB and FC rules, and the diffuser in the photos above is installed on a Van Diemen FC.
Stan Clayton
Stohr Cars
Wren, I don't see anything in the photos that would make that illegal for FC.
Then I am missing something. It really looks like the diffuser increases in width behind the centerline of the rear axle. Maybe I am just not seeing the pictures correctly/.
And if it does?
Stan Clayton
Stohr Cars
Does it matter if it gets wider as long as it is narrower than 95 cm?
Looks legal to me Wren. I did that to my stock VD diffuser back in 2001 and the difference was significantly better in lap times at downforce tracks.
Don't give those guys any more ideas.
Wren, for all Citations, the FB rules are that you have to run FF aero. And take that F1 inspired automatic shifter that shifts based on speed, rpm, individual wheel vertical forces and driver saliva rates off the car too.
Ken
FF Bodywork rules D.8.c last sentence : "Bodywork shall not increase in width behind the
centerline of the rear axle in any horizontal section."
I guess it depends on what the width is at the axle centerline, so if both are 95cm (or both the same measurement), there is no problem.
The first paragraph of D.8.c says:
Even if it remains less than 95cm, I do not think it is legal to have the bodywork increase in width behind the centerline of the rear axle.
I am sure that it is better, I am just not sure it is legal. I always thought it was a mistake for FB to allow diffusers to grow in width after the centerline of the rear axles. If someone is trying hard, they are probably going to spend the money to build a new diffuser that takes advantage of the FB rules. If the rules had been the same, then existing FC diffusers would have been adequate.
Brandon's car has had a diffuser that is FB legal and not FC legal on it since March of last year. It looks a lot like Stan's with some minor differences because of the extra overall width allowed FB. Brandon designed it specifically to fit the Citation assembly and Mike Devins did a great and inexpensive job building it exactly to Brandon's drawings. I think he was even able to have the mold machined in one setup.
Interesting. I read the rule that if the bodywork were 95cm at the rear axle centerline, then narrowed behind that and widened again to 95 it would not be legal. I understand that your interpretation is measuring at the rear axle centerline and again at the widest point?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote