Model Scale - Windtunnels and Windshear

[kebab]

You guys are aware that Ferrari has a division that sells and maintains old F1 cars for private owners. This service includes transportation and full track service. Most of the cars being sold at this time only function under the guidance of Ferrari personal. Why would the sounds not be from one of these cars?

Brian

This could well be the case but it doesnt explain the black tarpolan coverred the track boundary.

[bhall]

The Corse Clienti is also an excellent way to test without testing.

[hardingfv32]

I dunno how far it's accurate in terms of statistical figures

There is no 100% tunnel as accurate as the 60% tunnels for testing a F1 car.

Look at the expense of upgrading from a 50 to 60% tunnel. A 100% tunnel is not going to happen any time soon for financial reasons AND it will not happen in the USA where they only racers with budgets (small at that) are the NASCAR teams.

Brian

[bhall]

There is no 100% tunnel as accurate as the 60% tunnels for testing a F1 car.

How do you know? Do you have a source for this information?

How do you explain Windshear's popularity amongst a wide cross-section of race teams?

[FakeAlonso]

brian, read better what babibhusan wrote.

He cites:
- straightline real car testing, which is much more accuate than wt
-the Windshear 100% facility - more accurate than a 60 %wt

teams often do straightline testing, and sometimes (or often? they do not give much publicity to that) pay visit to Windshear in USA, which is an awesome facility.

Problem with 100% testing is that pieces are more expensive and long to build, hence it is used just for assessment of finalized parts

I agree with you about ferrari historical car department - not unusual for their clients to test in fiorano

Here is a video of the Windshear Wind Tunnel. Impressive!!

http://windshearinc.net/videos/windshear_DVD.html

I don't understand why Ferrari does not build a similar full scale wind tunnel. For those who would say they cant do it because of the RRA or budged constrains..... they can use the budget of the road cars so it wont appear on the expenses of the SF team.

[raymondu999]

You do realise they're not allowed a 100% wind tunnel? If they had a 100% WT then they wouldn't be allowed to use that for the F1 car. The whole budget/RRA issue is that they're not allowed to USE one. It's not that they're not allowed to HAVE one.

[FakeAlonso]

You do realise they're not allowed a 100% wind tunnel? If they had a 100% WT then they wouldn't be allowed to use that for the F1 car. The whole budget/RRA issue is that they're not allowed to USE one. It's not that they're not allowed to HAVE one.

Craig Scarborough ‏ @ScarbsF1

Teams can trade 4 days of scale wind tunnel testing at 60% (max size allowed) for 1 day full scale testing, i.e. straightline or windshear.

So how many days of 60% scale testing are allowed in a year? well divide that by four and they would have probably better results.

Lotus is trading at least 4 days

[bhall]

Nevertheless, that does explain why a team doesn't build its own full-scale wind tunnel. The restrictions regarding their use mean it's not a worthwhile investment.

[hardingfv32]

Windshear Wind Tunnel. Impressive!!

Very ordinary unit as wind tunnels go. Remember the business model, their main customer is NASCAR and maybe some recovering US automakers.

I would say it is 100% because none of these customers can afford 60% models.

Brian

[bhall]

I would say it is 100% because none of these customers can afford 60% models.

That makes as much sense as a football bat or a basketball helmet.

"I would say it is 100% because none of these customers can afford inferior 60% models."

See?

[raymondu999]

Craig Scarborough ‏ @ScarbsF1

Teams can trade 4 days of scale wind tunnel testing at 60% (max size allowed) for 1 day full scale testing, i.e. straightline or windshear.

So how many days of 60% scale testing are allowed in a year? well divide that by four and they would have probably better results.

I'm not convinced. There is probably a reason why most still go with 60%, and why you don't generally hear of a team losing 4 60% days for a 100% day.

For one thing you could test 4 times less parts - and for the tradeoff to be worthwhile; the accuracy has to be 4 times as accurate

[hardingfv32]

I would say it is 100% because none of these customers can afford inferior 60% models.

As usual your logic is flawed. While it is true that an actual car will be physically more accurate than a 60% model, testing an actual car in any 'existing' 100% tunnel has no where near the accuracy of a 60% model in a 60% tunnel. That is a fact.

The fact that all the major F1 teams have 50 or 60% tunnels establishes the validity of my claim.

Brian

[Crucial_Xtreme]

I dunno how far it's accurate in terms of statistical figures

There is no 100% tunnel as accurate as the 60% tunnels for testing a F1 car.

Look at the expense of upgrading from a 50 to 60% tunnel. A 100% tunnel is not going to happen any time soon for financial reasons AND it will not happen in the USA where they only racers with budgets (small at that) are the NASCAR teams.

Brian

I have to disagree. Windshear is arguably the best tunnel in the world. I live 5 minutes from the facility & it's amazing how many race teams from different series use it; F1, Indy, NASCAR, LeMans, etc. All of the top teams in F1 make their way to this facility at least once a year. I would venture to say Windshear is as accurate as the teams own facility, probably more so. No Brian the teams aren't allowed to test at 100% regularly due to costs. Has nothing to do with accuracy. Same reason they can't test at full speed.

edit: Also why in the world would an F1 team forfeit FOUR days of regular wind tunnel testing(60%) for ONE day of full scale 100% testing if 60% were so much more accurate? This only serves to prove the point further.

[bhall]

I would say it is 100% because none of these customers can afford inferior 60% models.

As usual your logic is flawed. While it is true that an actual car will be physically more accurate than a 60% model, testing an actual car in any 'existing' 100% tunnel has no where near the accuracy of a 60% model in a 60% tunnel. That is a fact.

The fact that all the major F1 teams have 50 or 60% tunnels establishes the validity of my claim.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc, eh, Brian?

The fact that all the major F1 teams have 50 or 60% tunnels only establishes the fact that all the major F1 teams have 50 or 60% tunnels. It says nothing more.

But, please, by all means regale us in detailed stories of your visits to every wind tunnel in the world. Perhaps we'll indeed draw the same educated conclusion if you just give us a chance to share in your wealth of firsthand knowledge on the subject.

[raymondu999]

I would say it is 100% because none of these customers can afford inferior 60% models.

As usual your logic is flawed. While it is true that an actual car will be physically more accurate than a 60% model, testing an actual car in any 'existing' 100% tunnel has no where near the accuracy of a 60% model in a 60% tunnel. That is a fact.

The fact that all the major F1 teams have 50 or 60% tunnels establishes the validity of my claim.

Brian

Why would using the physical car, in a 100% WT; be less accurate than using the 60% model in a 60% WT? You don't have to make any adjustments in the 100% set; and everything in terms of the moving object is the same; as opposed to the 60%