Hi I am sending the car for Singapore.
Should I add in the text file we use for rake, which of the two CoP models I am going to use? I will use to "improved" (COP2) version, so I will be ok for the next races.
While that plot carries your team name, the post is intended for everyone. Please check the plots and make sure to not relay on non-converged data.
Yes, the rules say, you need to provide the text file. Also it is not your choice, which CoP to use. For this race, MFlow will export the one in your advantage. Last race that was the new one for every car.
I might get late submission of the car as still struggling to get the full power from the car, and still struggling with some parts. Apparently I took more demanding approach than I thought at the beginning, but I see huge potential in many areas. Yet many solutions bring more surprises than actual direction for development. This race for sure will be next part of learning and getting along with this car aero.
I have just spent a little bit of time and I think I have found the hole in my car so just setup a quick case to run through to see if it fixed it (this is the first simulation i have ever run the car through)
When looking at your last car, I found multiple holes. Newer OF plus versions have a tool to detect these holes. We have a few more Linux users signed up this year, if you like, I could create a tutorial on how to use it.
Well computer decided to restart during the simulation and its late here on the other side of the world, So think i will submit it and hope for the best.. (dont wast time trying to fix it if there are still holes.)LVDH wrote: ↑09 Sep 2019, 15:15When looking at your last car, I found multiple holes. Newer OF plus versions have a tool to detect these holes. We have a few more Linux users signed up this year, if you like, I could create a tutorial on how to use it.
I decided to just open up the intake a lot; by the looks of it I probably now have somewhere near twice the opening size in my sidepod that you had for the first race... if that doesn’t solve it the next thing will be to shorten the sidepods as the outlets are probably now the most restrictive part...
I submitted the car yesterday but I am not happy about the cooling. I will run another simulation tonight: 3,0 m^3/s will be a difficult goal to achieve.machin wrote: ↑09 Sep 2019, 17:50I decided to just open up the intake a lot; by the looks of it I probably now have somewhere near twice the opening size in my sidepod that you had for the first race... if that doesn’t solve it the next thing will be to shorten the sidepods as the outlets are probably now the most restrictive part...
I am wondering what Variante’s sidepods will look like this race... and did anyone else decide to try something similar...?
Shortening sidepods will end up with cooling like mine and variante in Spa - I can guarantee that, so it's not a good idea.machin wrote: ↑09 Sep 2019, 17:50I decided to just open up the intake a lot; by the looks of it I probably now have somewhere near twice the opening size in my sidepod that you had for the first race... if that doesn’t solve it the next thing will be to shorten the sidepods as the outlets are probably now the most restrictive part...
I am wondering what Variante’s sidepods will look like this race... and did anyone else decide to try something similar...?
Yes indeed, so louvres, louvres everywhere ^^machin wrote: ↑09 Sep 2019, 20:26The Team Koldskaal solution with the fully louvred sidepod downstream of the heat exchanger is an interesting one.... and he achieved the full flow rate... maybe something to bear in mind if we’re still getting problems next time...
Pure Power also got the 3m^3/sec, his solution used really big intake openings....
Much more conservative, i fear. Maybe i'll give another chance to the extreme sidepods in the future, but for the moment i have to play safe(er).