[MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2018

[CAEdevice]

One thing I found to help with simulations was additional monitoring surfaces
1 at the floor entry and 1 at the diffuser entry. This way I could see if my changes were getting more or less flow through these areas and the images show me where it is coming from and going too.

I did the same (plus an additional surface in front of mirrors in order to have a streamline picture)

[Team_Bart]

Thanks for the tips! During the season I'm already learning that you have to start much easier . Anyway it is still a very nice way to learn about aerodynamics! It is cool to read how the top-teams started their projects. Probably it is nice to make a kind of diary next season about how a car is developed! Especially those initial values as for example the heat exchanger inlets are really interesting if you have to start from scratch. On the other hand you don't have to make it to easy .

[machin]

Every now and again people post some of their CFD images, and you will always find that someone else like Variante or Matteo (CAEdevice) will take a look at what it shows and give some advice... I really like that about the MVRC community -everyone is willing to help out (until you start winning)... So maybe you might want to post a CFD image of a particular part and hopefully someone will give some good advice....?

(and of course there is the "Introduction to Racecar Aerodynamics" document on the MVRC web page... )

[Alonso Fan]

Oh wow
I don't know what to say. I didn't even know this page existed

I thought someone would post something on the old 2017 thread about migrating to the new topic. Guess I was just too busy to notice.

Anyway looking good for you guys so far. Maybe I'll make something for next season

[variante]

Hey Machin, I played a bit with your laptime simulator. Does it suggest that Daytona and Pikes Peak reward downforce much more than Monaco, or did I do something wrong? I kept efficiency constant and increased downforce (and drag) by a certain value, then I calculated the gains in terms of percentage over the base laptime.

I would expect Pikes Peak to be very high downforce indeed, but what about Daytona?

[Ft5fTL]

This is my entry for the third race. Significant changes on the front end lowered the drag but also messed up the balance. I couldn't fix that on time for this one.

[CAEdevice]

https://i.imgur.com/FWD1Wov.png

This is my entry for the third race. Significant changes on the front end lowered the drag but also messed up the balance. I couldn't fix that on time for this one.

The car looks elegant. Some details are interesting (waves in the wing profile, flat canards, rear suspension covers) other details are less clear (possible flow blockage between the rear fenders and the sidepods?)

[BlakjeKaas]

Also interesting to see that the undertray of the car seems to be quite high on the sides.

Apart from your car running sidepods (and some intricate details), I have to say that there are quite some similarities between your current car and mine.

However, I can only assume that performance wise, I'll still be off by quite a margin as even your last car would already beat me by probably around a second.

It looks pretty smooth however, can't wait to see it from more different angles

[machin]

Hey Machin, I played a bit with your laptime simulator. Does it suggest that Daytona and Pikes Peak reward downforce much more than Monaco, or did I do something wrong? I kept efficiency constant and increased downforce (and drag) by a certain value, then I calculated the gains in terms of percentage over the base laptime.

You get the same sort of information in the last few lines of the bottom window. Yes Daytona and Pikes Peak reward higher downforce more than Monaco when the efficiency is kept the same...

...Monaco is a funny one: It doesn't really reward high downforce as such since there are no really high speed corners except the Swimming Pool, but since there are no long straights it doesn't penalise high drag either, so the best set-up is a high downforce one. Daytona and Pikes Peak both have some really fast corners so they really do reward high downforce.... (conversely they also have some high speed parts which would reward low drag, but not enough to counteract the parts that reward downforce....)

[CAEdevice]

Reading the interesting posts by Machin I wonder how much F1 is trying to do about reducing aerodynamics performance influence working on the cars and how much would it be possble to do working on the tracks.

[Ft5fTL]

https://i.imgur.com/FWD1Wov.png

This is my entry for the third race. Significant changes on the front end lowered the drag but also messed up the balance. I couldn't fix that on time for this one.

The car looks elegant. Some details are interesting (waves in the wing profile, flat canards, rear suspension covers) other details are less clear (possible flow blockage between the rear fenders and the sidepods?)

I tried different rear fenders and sidepods, sadly it didn't worked out the way how i wanted to be.

Also interesting to see that the undertray of the car seems to be quite high on the sides.

Variante has a similar solution on his car. Just trying to get more airflow to the diffuser.

[LVDH]

OK,
I have had a look at the cars, everything is prepared to get sent off to the HPC. Here are the images:

Better resolution over here on the Challenge page:
https://mantiumchallenge.com/cars-mvrc-sao_paulo-2018/

[CAEdevice]

CAEdevice is the usual boring car, only updated in details.

Generally speaking, it seems that the quality of the CAD geometry is improving, congratulations to all the teams.

Variante and JJR have a frontal projection of the rear wing with curvature opposite to mine, this is an interesting detail. My wing has a low efficiency (6.1) but it has very little impact on the overall performance, because the load and aerodynamic drag are very small. They both use a double profile instead of a single airfoil.

My mental CFD forecast is: 1) JJR 2) Variante 3) Talno

[TalnoRacing]

My mental CFD forecast is: 1) JJR 2) Variante 3) Talno

I hope you are correct, but I am not so sure looking at the numbers I have. For some reason I am struggling a lot with generating enough front downforce, it is very frustrating at the moment.

[CAEdevice]

My mental CFD forecast is: 1) JJR 2) Variante 3) Talno

I hope you are correct, but I am not so sure looking at the numbers I have. For some reason I am struggling a lot with generating enough front downforce, it is very frustrating at the moment.

It is the second time that your car looks promising. Sorry for the front downforce, have you tried something like this? Your wing profile seems to have a small angle.