[MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2017

[machin]

That is so cool Gary!

On RJSA's earlier post: I really hope we do see "GT1" cars at Le Mans again... For me that's what Le Mans cars should look like (I.e proper 2 seater sportscars) and F1 cars should look like the Redbull Gran Turismo concept from a few years back... I've never been a huge fan of the "one and a half seaters" that we've had for the past 10 years or so. There is the potential to have really interesting cars with advanced lower body aerodynamics, but with a more "sportscar" upper body; I.e bring the beauty back to Le Mans. And if the marketability of the cars is improved hopefully that means more manufacturers... Ferrari vs Porsche at Le Mans.... Yes please!

[CAEdevice]

Hi Machin, it is funny... I have the opposite point of view: I don't like the fact that a car is asymmetrical. I know that there are historical reasons... but... what about a 3 seats car ?

[LVDH]

Hi guys,
this is all very cool stuff. Also I have good news for our hopefully new team:
I have to delay the next race by one week.

Also I was at the Motorsport Expo in Cologne today. If things work out as discussed, we will have yet another very cool prize for this years championship and we will get some media coverage, which is awesome. This also means that what I once warned you about, we will see more detailed images of the cars including CFD images. I know that some people will not like this and want to keep their cars secret but it will get us even more fans. And I think nobody should really complain when their car is featured in a top notch engineering magazine, right?

And Matteo and Gary, these are cool images. I hope there will be even nicer ones for the next race. If you need help if importing CFD results into your render software, I am happy to help.

That is so cool Gary!

On RJSA's earlier post: I really hope we do see "GT1" cars at Le Mans again... For me that's what Le Mans cars should look like (I.e proper 2 seater sportscars) and F1 cars should look like the Redbull Gran Turismo concept from a few years back... I've never been a huge fan of the "one and a half seaters" that we've had for the past 10 years or so. There is the potential to have really interesting cars with advanced lower body aerodynamics, but with a more "sportscar" upper body; I.e bring the beauty back to Le Mans. And if the marketability of the cars is improved hopefully that means more manufacturers... Ferrari vs Porsche at Le Mans.... Yes please!

I agree 1000%. Also I think that this kind of Red Bull car would be super cool for our championship. I am still not sure in which direction we should go next year.

[CAEdevice]

I have to add that Gary is not only working on the renderings but also on a simulation model that will be available for AssettoCorsa (and driveble as well), one of the best and more realistic driving simulators.

From my side I am completing the CFD simulations required to completey describe the car behaviour in different conditions (ex. distance from ground, rake, ...) in order to put the right numbers into the physical model.

About next year: LMP1/LMP2 cars are far better in my opinion, but any layout would be ok, provided that realism is the most important target of the rulebook.

About revealing details and cfd... ok... obtorto collo, as ancient Romans used to say.

[machin]

Hi, I was looking at this image (I think it is the Perrinn LMP1):

http://www.racecar-engineering.com/wp-c ... upper3.jpg


It looks that they don't use expansion to increase the pressure on the hx. They simply rely on the total energy of the flow.

In my car I tried to ontain the biggest expansion (maybe too much beacuse I have flow separation in the cooling ducts).

What do you think about?

Interesting! So having a shorter inlet duct improves the flow and.... Allows a smaller inlet opening cross-section....?

Can you see on the Perrin (or Caterham, Variante) what the outlet looks like? I presume on the low pressure side it is more important to have a smooth, gentle, flow?

I should change my guide book!

[CAEdevice]

Hi, I was looking at this image (I think it is the Perrinn LMP1):

http://www.racecar-engineering.com/wp-c ... upper3.jpg


It looks that they don't use expansion to increase the pressure on the hx. They simply rely on the total energy of the flow.

In my car I tried to ontain the biggest expansion (maybe too much beacuse I have flow separation in the cooling ducts).

What do you think about?

Interesting! So having a shorter inlet duct improves the flow and.... Allows a smaller inlet opening cross-section....?

Can you see on the Perrin (or Caterham, Variante) what the outlet looks like? I presume on the low pressure side it is more important to have a smooth, gentle, flow?

I should change my guide book!

I think it is a compromise. They renounced to the advantages of expansion but they gained a much more compact/shaped sidepod (I am getting crazy with my car hx placement...).

Expansion gives other "plus", first of all a better efficiency (lower drag), because air goes through the hx with lower speed.

I think most of real cars simply don't have an outlet cooling duct.

[garyjpaterson]

Just added some of Matteo's more recent aero upgrades, to keep it more in line with what he's been racing with lately.




New taller wing mirrors maybe aren't the most practical from a driving perspective I'm sure a digital rearview camera cane be installed to ensure rear visibility is fine though!

[etsmc]

New taller wing mirrors maybe aren't the most practical from a driving perspective I'm sure a digital rearview camera can be installed to ensure rear visibility is fine though!

This is a valid point. should next years cars ditch the side mirrors?
Are there any other technological advancements people have seen that will have an influence on the design?

[CAEdevice]

Interesting point, this could help Chris with dlthe design of the rear view box

[MadMatt]

Wow, these renderings are AMAZING!

[garyjpaterson]

Yeah to be fair my side windows/doors are probably smaller than what i think it a mandated size in LMP, which gives the positioning of the mirror less freedom from a visibility perspective.

Otherwise there aren't any major issues I ran into regarding packaging, it all sort of works as you would expect with plenty room for the driver etc.

I did find the lack of tie rods in the suspension funny, will have to find a place for that on the rear as its fairly visible - I also expect trying to package your springs/dampers/rockers etc might take a little more space than expected (sort of where the exhausts are for a pushrod setup). Front wheels needed a tiny bit more space in the arches to avoid rubbing when turning, and steering lock is limited but seems to be in line with LMP1 cars.



I imagine from a structural point of view this rear wing wouldn't cope too well, with a lack of strut bearing the load. Looks epic though!

[CAEdevice]

I imagine from a structural point of view this rear wing wouldn't cope too well, with a lack of strut bearing the load. Looks epic though!

Yes, it is an (extreme) high downforce airfoil coupled with the (extreme) low downforce pillars... but for a graphic AC model it could be acceptable (maybe you can increase the dimension of the pillars section, to have a more realistic geometry).

[garyjpaterson]

I imagine from a structural point of view this rear wing wouldn't cope too well, with a lack of strut bearing the load. Looks epic though!

Yes, it is an (extreme) high downforce airfoil coupled with the (extreme) low downforce pillars... but for a graphic AC model it could be acceptable (maybe you can increase the dimension of the pillars section, to have a more realistic geometry).

Yeah could easily make the pillars stronger in appearance. Right now they look like the end plates of the 2017 Toyota LMP1, except that one has a load bearing pillar in the centre!

[CAEdevice]

I imagine from a structural point of view this rear wing wouldn't cope too well, with a lack of strut bearing the load. Looks epic though!

Yes, it is an (extreme) high downforce airfoil coupled with the (extreme) low downforce pillars... but for a graphic AC model it could be acceptable (maybe you can increase the dimension of the pillars section, to have a more realistic geometry).

Yeah could easily make the pillars stronger in appearance. Right now they look like the end plates of the 2017 Toyota LMP1, except that one has a load bearing pillar in the centre!

I confirm: the high downforce version had a couple of central pillars (the rule book requires to have two pillars with minumum distance from the simmetry plane)

[RicME85]

Its funny....just the addition of bodywork fit lines on those models makes the car look so much better