Verus Engineering Rear Wing Development
 

Velox Motorsports is working on developing our own wing profile and we are looking for information from you, the enthusiasts, to help us with a few key features to make it a solid performer for you guys. In typical fashion, we’re after function over form; but, we’re going to try our best to make it look nice as well.

http://imgur.com/UU648db.jpg

http://imgur.com/hJ9wDAu.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/iYGA4Ay.png

http://i.imgur.com/VIIaG5C.png

http://i.imgur.com/gepQCrW.png

Your own Profile? What does that mean?:
We wanted to create a highly efficient wing that doesn’t have a large drop off in efficiency with larger angles of attack (AOA). We started with a known profile that performed close to what we were after, and then we used ANSYS Adjoint Solver within Fluent to help us sculpt it into an even better performing unit.

ANSYS Adjoint Solver:
This is something not many people in our market know about, let alone heard before. This is the same technology that F1 companies utilize to optimize their aero packages. Aerodynamics are not very intuitive, you think A will happen and B, C, or Z happens. ANSYS Adjoint Solver is a large reason why the latest generations of F1 cars look so odd; it’s due to this software’s ability to optimize the geometry in ways us designers would never think about without thousands upon thousands of hours of work.

Your much-appreciated Input:
With the profile figured out, we’re optimizing endplate and gurney flap design now but we really need help on designing mounting.

The rear wing needs to be tied directly to structural components of the car, the loads the wing will produce at speeds will deform the trunk. So that leads us to two main potential options:

1) Mounted through the rear bumper to the rear crash beam or a rear crash beam-like structure.

a. Positives:

i. Less expensive

ii. Can retain use of trunk with wing removed (potentially even with wing installed)

iii. Changing rear bumper out isn’t horrible if reverting back to stock

iv. Removal and install would be fairly easy

b. Negatives:

i. For ease of install, the wing would be mounted on the bottom and not swan neck.

ii. This reduces efficiency of the wing but isn’t a massive performance hit

iii. You can’t say you have a swan neck wing.

2) Mounting the wing through the rear trunk to a structural part of the vehicle

a. Positives:

i. Swan neck mounting could be utilized

ii. Improved efficiency/performance

b. Negatives

i. Trunk would no longer be water tight

ii. Trunk would no longer be useful

iii. More expensive the option 1

iv. Basically a race/track car only setup

If there is anything else we're not considering, please let us know.

Thanks,
Eric

Race car only setup unlikely to sell in large numbers. so go with 1. the fact its cheaper doesnt hurt

For #2, instead of going through the trunk lid, what about going through the body just to either side of the trunk lid? That way you wouldn't have to worry about trying to reinforce a moving part (trunk lid), although I would still want to reinforce the section of sheet metal that the wing did attach to. Making bracing to fit the curve of that panel might be too much of a pain in the ass to be cost effective though.

I've seen a swan neck chassis mount wing on an 86, so it is doable. The chassis mount setup looked cumbersome and still interfered with trunk operation, but I'm sure it worked well for downforce.

How about a wing designed be legal in most race classes? This could be accomplished with a few minor variants.

Are you making a universal wing or one specific to a chassis?

Does your current design mean your wing would be inefficient at low AOA?

Go with #1.

Living in the Northeast, the idea of my trunk not being water tight is a huge turnoff. However, I am not really excited about a bumper mounted setup either. It seems to be a huge fad as of lately to have a massive amount of hardware hanging off the bumper. (See pic below.) Although, you may be able to convince me with performance stats that seem consistent with Velox products.

Fad and stupid.
https://i.imgsafe.org/16a383b6fd.jpg

The again, something like this might be enticing.
https://i.imgsafe.org/1681a78966.jpg

We would like to make this legal in most race classes. Most of the development to date is on the airfoil and endplates. Need to do more research on wing rules for different classes.

We are making a universal wing that can be used in multiple chassis platforms. However, the main chassis this is being designed around is the FT86 and the ND Miata currently.

"Does your current design mean your wing would be inefficient at low AOA?" Nope. Since you are pretty knowledgeable in the racing community, you know that aerodynamics can be peaky and have massive drop-offs in downforce. This is bad obviously when on the track. Wings have this same problem when it stalls. Stall happens when the downforce drops while drag increases. Our goal was to have a very "soft" stalling airfoil. Below is some data (numbers removed) to show a graphical representation of what I mean with soft stall. Hopefully my jumbled words make sense :thumbsup:

http://i1383.photobucket.com/albums/...psja6ptuec.png

I would like option 1.

I need to retain cargo space inside the car for a set of track wheels.

I would even drive on the road with the wing inside the car. (no passenger seat makes it easyer).

Do you have a target price point yet?

Going through the body would be a permanent, race-car like modification in our opinion. That is part of the unibody! Not a modification to be taken lightly.

The swan necks I have seen that are mounted to a structural part of the chassis lose all use of the trunk and would not be water tight without some silicone or some form a waterproofing.

Too early for us to give a definitive answer. We're going to do our best to keep it competitively priced while offering some neat aspects/performance advantages.

Thanks,
Eric

I vote for option #2 with a bolt in support structure and swan necks through a modified trunk lid. The mounts for the support structure could potentially be welded in but make the structure itself removable. For DD the structure could then be removed and an unmodified trunk lid put back on. Why DD with a wing anyway?? Best of both worlds!

I was curious on this whole "chassis mounted" wing thing so I started doing some research. I found a thread on Track Junkies and posted it below. There is some pretty good data in there along with some valid arguments all before the thread goes sideways and the topic blurs....like most threads. lol. Anyway. They all seem to think the chassis mount is "a gimmick" for "street" cars and I tend to agree.

Please hear me out. I own a bunch of Velox products and do not doubt their engineering. However. There are a ton of trunk mounted wing options that do not distort the sheet metal. The swan neck seibon wing is MASSIVE. Speed Academy put one on their FRS and did not have problems with sheet metal. Even if there is sheet metal distortion there are easy ways to remedy this that will be far easier than developing a chassis mount setup. And the wing would probably sell better seeing as you don't have to cut into anything (aside from a few holes in the trunk.)

Just my 2 cents. I am but a mere design engineer that is over excited for a wing with data to be produced.

https://www.trackjunkies.org/topic/4...ssis-mounting/

I like the idea of option 1, very excited for this thread :)

I'm just going to start a direct deposit for you fellas at Velox/speedfactory :D lol

IMO, a trunk mounted option with a backing plate for load distribution is the best of both.

It would be nice to be able to easily get into the trunk to adjust the rear suspension, even for a track only car. With two fixed mounting seats and a roll cage, it would be extremely hard to get to the adjusters.