Will a wing with no taper & no sweep generate vortexes with the exception of the wing tips?

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "with the exception of the wing tips". All finite wings generate vortices. So, yes, your purely rectangular wing will generate vortices.

If you're referring to the spanwise vortices that form along the leading edge of a highly swept wing at high angles of attack (like what's seen over the chines of an F-18 during a high-G maneuver), then no, a straight rectangular wing will not generate these vortices.

I will say YES.

Not because I know aerodynamically, but it is common in Q500 racing to catch extremely bad air vortexes if you follow closely behind another plane. The results can be extreme with loss of control for several seconds.

These wings have no taper, and no sweep.

The faster Q40 planes (Pictured in my Avatar) we fly with a tapered wing put off more of a Vortex and can quite easily cause a crash if you are not carefull.

Dave

When flying Control Line Stunt on a calm day, one takes a step or two backward between each repeated maneuver. Else you run into the messed up air from the previous maneuver. I have crashed twice from forgetting to do so.

Jim

At the 1960 FAI Control-Line Internats in Budapest, it was common to see the trees at the edge of the control-line circle buffet from the vortices of planes doing consecutive loops directly upwind of the trees. Steve Wooley's plane was the most remarkable that I recall for this effect.

Like Crewguy I'm not sure I follow either. Straight or swept you don't get vortices except at the tips anyway. There are exceptions like the forward strakes on fighters that sort of ACT like wingtips and if the sweep angle is high enough like on a delta you can get rollling air flowing from the lower to the upper side at higher angles of attack but for the most part it's only the tips that generate vertices.

Am I right in suggesting that the size of the vortex will be affected by the lift co-efficient the wing is under.

So high G turns and loops will generate bigger tip vortexes than level flight?

If you increased the AR of your pylon racer (keeping the wing area constant) the tip vortex would be smaller... but the wing would be weaker too (using the same profile).

You could mess around with tip devices like expander tips, diffuser tips or winglets, and even end plates but you are unlikely to get much improvement.

Eagles and Vultures can change their tip feathers to reduce wing tip drag at will - but that many feathers would mean just a few extra servos .

Vortex strength is directly linked to Cl. A model in level flight will produce a much weaker vortex pair than a model in a high-g maneuver. A model flying a ballistic trajectory (think Vomit Comet) produces no vortex.

A model in level flight at high speed will produce a smaller vortex than the same model in level flight at low speed.

Think of it this way: While a model is in flight, the wing is producing a region of higher pressure below the wing and lower pressure above the wing. Since the air to the side of the wing is at some intermediate pressure, the air below the wing will have a tendency to gain an outward velocity component and the air above will tend to gain an inward velocity component as the air tries to return to a uniform pressure. Since the pressure gradient across the wing is the same regardless of speed (we're assuming zero washout for simplicity) the outward and inward acceleration of the airmass is the same for high and low speeds. At high speed, the air spends less time under and over the wing than it does at low speeds. Less time accelerating = lower final velocity. Therefore, a fast plane produces a weaker vortex than a slow plane.

End plates act as a barrier to this inward and outward acceleration, and in doing so, reduce the strength of the resulting vortex.

Winglets act partially as end plates, and also as a vertically-oriented high-washout wingtip. The angle of attack of the winglets is usually set to produce a vortex in the opposite direction of that naturally produced by the wing, thereby partially cancelling the lift-induced vortex.

Both of these approaches effectively increase the aspect ratio of a finite wing. The exact design intricacies make it difficult to design a truly effective wingtip device, and a poorly designed device will actually reduce performance. So, for model purposes, they're probably more trouble than they're worth (unless you have access to a powerful suite of CFD software).