beschadigunc wrote: ↑06 Mar 2023, 02:09
variante wrote: ↑05 Mar 2023, 23:38
This is a variant of my car from last year, modified to satisfy a cooling requirement of 2m3/s (from last year's 3m3/s).
As you can see, our cars would have a better chance to reflect F1 design language.
Moreover, reaching the cooling target would be less tedious and labor intensive.
(i also used the real F1 rule-boxes, allowing for a wider cooling exit at the back, as well as a smaller engine)
https://i.imgur.com/hoT3qlb.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/WoPlk6L.jpg
Totally agreed that the cooling targets are hard to reach, but to be fair hitting 1.5 midR with fairly f1 like inlets and outlets have been relatively easy for me and my partner. It is hard to make sure internal flow is guided nicely and your outlet condition is happy and the big engine and large need for an outlet surely makes the performance part harder. I would suggest reducing it to 2.5 rather than 2 to keep the part of the challange
The side effect of forcing higher cooling targets is that people will prefer to reach them in weird ways, rather than to optimize a realistic F1 sidepod. Punching big holes in the sidepods is just easier, more appealing.
So, paradoxically, that discourages sensible aerodynamic research, and encourages the "punching holes" approach.
Also, reaching the target shouldn't be hard anyway. The rule exists to make sure we don't make unrealistically small sidepods.
BTW, Mercedes have the smallest real-life sidepods, and they would still be hard (or impossible) to make with a 2m3/s requirement.
nick00 wrote: ↑05 Mar 2023, 20:34
Hello, I would like to take part too. It would be my first time. Any idea with the time schedule for the new year? When the new rules will be completed? Thank you
Truth is nobody knows, even the CFD-guy/organizer...