So to take this further- lets just say that you would agree that the separation bump is a function of roll rate with high entry speed.
I would not agree with that assumption. The "bump" is caused by
flow separation on the lower surface of the aileron that goes TE UP. Its not trapping air in front of it either. It is flow separation caused by exposing a very tight radius to the free stream (the water pipe Van uses as a counterbalance in the nose of the aileron is the radius I refer to here). That separated flow is very unstable and unsteady and is what you feel in the stick.
Roll rate is what we get due to the differential lift on the wings. It is opposed by something called "roll damping". That is a fancy way to refer to the counter-forces built up on the wings as roll rate increases. The up-going wing has its angle of attack reduced due to the rolling maneuver. The down-going wing has its AOA increased in like manner. These changes in AOA drive lift forces for each wing in the
opposite direction of the roll. That is what forces a roll rate to stabilize at a certain point. Roll damping. And a rectangle wing planform has lots of it, requiring bigger ailerons for a given roll rate.
The twist I mentioned before is
spanwise twist. Its twist like if you took the wingtip in your hands and tried to force its leading edge up and trailing edge down. This kind of twist produces diagonal wrinkles in the skin on the wing. This has no relation to accelerated rolling motion. Its analyzed as a steady state load. Roll and/or yaw acceleration is a player for secondary structural loads such as tip tanks, under wing stores, etc.
he RV 6 series wing is designed to take 6 G?s positive (plus a 50% safety factor.) That is around 9 G?s at positive and 4.5 negative before something gives? So this is an ?approximate? function of strength to twisting loads that the wing can handle also.
Bending strength has little relation to twisting strength, Brad. In a traditional structure like ours, bending loads are carried by the main wing spar. Spar caps and shear web do that job.
Wing twist, or torsion, is carried by what is called the "wing box" or "spar box". That is the "box" defined by the four "walls": Main spar, rear spar, ribs (2), and wing skins (top and bottom). There are thus a series of "boxes" in each wing. Without the skin, these boxes could not carry torsional loads. After you skin the wing, it becomes stiff in torsion.
Deflecting the ailerons loads the wing in torsion. The torsional loads are carried by the wing box into the fuselage where they are reacted by the main and rear spar. Note your rear spar attach is literally a hinge: a single bolt! That's because it is
by design unable to carry any bending (that is all forced into the main spar). The rear spar carries only shear loads for reacting drag and torsion forces. Thats it.
The reason I explained all of this is to give you more insight into how wings are basically designed and how they work structurally. Bending and torsional strength are
designed to be basically exclusive of one and other.
On a happier note, you should also know that our aileron design -although quite old - is safe. The bumping you took note of is not a safety problem. However, I have no good "bandaid" fix for it.