Delta wing car concept

[GSpeedR]

It's a 4 wheeled vehicle and it's behavior will more closely mimic that of a 4 wheeled vehicle than a 3 wheeled. Simply the fact that there are 4 tires makes this pretty obvious

Don't you think that the relative positions of the tyre contact patches (which determines the overall load transfer) on the Deltawing more closely resemble a Trike than a conventional car?

Perhaps in terms of weight transfer (was it 10% front roll stiffness ratio?), but the front track width is not zero (to be fair, an actual trike will be able to resist some roll moment due to the width of the contact patch). A more important distinction (IMO) between a trike and the DeltaWing is the fact that there are two tires on the front axle, each capable of operating at differing conditions (alignments, etc).

[Scania]

Now they go to LM and play with a very high handicap.

I don't think they're playing with a handicap -I think they're playing with an advantage -they're allowed to run at half the weight, but more than half the power... I think they'll put in a fairly good (unfair) performance....

but they have a speed limt 300km/h

[P.S.]

When you saved all the weight from the added componets, you can reconstruct the chassi and safe... weight.... again ! At that point you can go back and restart with reducing weight and drag with smaller brakes....

Oh, I totally agree....

Okay, and I see you allready got all the correct numbers in minutes.

Now they go to LM and play with a very high handicap.

To be more precise the ACO dictated a laptime between 3:35 and 3:40. So Bowlby and his team will follow this demand.
Audi and Toyota are the big player with the money. So they have the right to get the spot lights on their cars. It would be destructive for the le mans series if one little car would catch all the attention. And it wouldn´t be fair, because Bowlby has thrown the rule book away.

The important thing in the future will be, whether the ACO or other racing series will change the rule books to the point, where fuel efficiency is a serious target for the ingeneers. (I don´t think they have the balls for that in the near future).
Otherwise I don´t see the value of this project. My two cent...

In the past some race car engineers (Colin Chapman and Jim Hall to) have mentioned that it would be very usefull to just limit the fuel, so resource efficent car design will win. Bowlby just shows, that current cars are far away from that.

[machin]

I also think a pure fuel limit is the way ahead... would be interesting for us geeks! and good for the marketing departments of the manufacturers involved...

it wouldn't change anything regarding the Deltawing though.... it doesn't matter what chassis an engine is in... if its putting out 350bhp then that means it'll be burning fuel at approx 50kg per hour.. if the chassis is more efficient that just means it'll go faster whilst using the fuel at that rate, not burn any less fuel... so the car that wins under a "fuel limit" formula is still the one that can go fastest around a track with whatever power that fuel limit allows. I think the evidance clearly shows the fastest way around a track with corners is to have a car with.... oh you know the rest

[countersteer]

Interesting write-up by Gordon Kirby...

http://gordonkirby.com/categories/colum ... no327.html

@ 575 kilos (1265 lbs.) wet, with driver, I wonder what the "half the weight" is of, lol...

Interested to see lap times with 300 hp on board.

I could really do without the SpeedRacer tale fin though...

[Giblet]

It feels just like a racing car. The stability is the most impressive thing. There are a sequence of esses at Buttonwillow and the way it went through there was very impressive"

Nissan has provided us with out first-choice engine. It's a spectacular piece. We've got the engine of our dreams: it's the right weight, has the right power, and it's phenomenally efficient.

[machin]

@ 575 kilos (1265 lbs.) wet, with driver, I wonder what the "half the weight" is of, lol...

Without driver and fluids the weight is reportedly 475kg (I'm sure earlier reports said 450....?)... anyway around half the dry weight of a "normal" le mans prototype (900kg)...

interesting articles.... one of his other columns (linked at the bottom of the one linked above) talks in depth about the tyres:

in fact the rear tyres for the Deltawing are Indy lights front tyres

So nothing special there then.... that means we can use traditional tyre data to analyse the rear of the car at least... and considering its the rears which are more heavily loaded that means the conclusions we reach based on normal tyre data should be pretty good....

Looking at my numbers again, with two cars identical except one with the Delta layout (tyre sizes and weight/downforce distribution) and one rectangular and 5% heavier my simulations suggest the two cars would put in identical lap times at Le Mans if the Deltawing has 25% less drag than the rectangular car... so the question is would the Deltawing create 25% less drag than a rectangular shaped car which is also allowed to use ground effect Tunnels (rather than the current flat bottom and wing approach)? Again one for someone with CFD capabilities to look at....

At more twisty circuits the "drag reduction required to equalise lap times" is naturally much bigger.... essentially the drag reduction and small weight reduction needs to compensate for the poorer cornering performance..... but at twistier circuits, not only is more time spent in the corners, but also speeds are generally lower so drag has less of an effect on lap time.... a double whammy favouring the rectangular layout at those circuits....

[Scania]

on口car, air flow will impact to the body directly, but after mersure by a cone nose & the body is on the rear, the flow can around the body, and that's y we can't drive a 300hp Caterham or SRx to make 300km/h

and delta shape make acce when you come out the coner make lots of Strengths, let's see RB7 in Monza.

also, it can brake so late.

[Scania]

and as the barycenter is alway on the rear & it womn't move, unlike normal car, you can feel the movement quiet well and it give u confidence to push harder

[Pierce89]

@ 575 kilos (1265 lbs.) wet, with driver, I wonder what the "half the weight" is of, lol...

Without driver and fluids the weight is reportedly 475kg (I'm sure earlier reports said 450....?)... anyway around half the dry weight of a "normal" le mans prototype (900kg)...

interesting articles.... one of his other columns (linked at the bottom of the one linked above) talks in depth about the tyres:

in fact the rear tyres for the Deltawing are Indy lights front tyres

So nothing special there then.... that means we can use traditional tyre data to analyse the rear of the car at least... and considering its the rears which are more heavily loaded that means the conclusions we reach based on normal tyre data should be pretty good....

Looking at my numbers again, with two cars identical except one with the Delta layout (tyre sizes and weight/downforce distribution) and one rectangular and 5% heavier my simulations suggest the two cars would put in identical lap times at Le Mans if the Deltawing has 25% less drag than the rectangular car... so the question is would the Deltawing create 25% less drag than a rectangular shaped car which is also allowed to use ground effect Tunnels (rather than the current flat bottom and wing approach)? Again one for someone with CFD capabilities to look at....

At more twisty circuits the "drag reduction required to equalise lap times" is naturally much bigger.... essentially the drag reduction and small weight reduction needs to compensate for the poorer cornering performance..... but at twistier circuits, not only is more time spent in the corners, but also speeds are generally lower so drag has less of an effect on lap time.... a double whammy favouring the rectangular layout at those circuits....

yeah dry weight may be 475 Kg, but the 900 Kg of the LMP1's is all inclusive. By my math, 575 is a good bit more than half of 900. I'm starting to think the only thing super advanced here is its ability to flaunt the rules.

[machin]

that's y we can't drive a 300hp Caterham or SRx to make 300km/h.

But neither of those cars are designed for the high speeds of Le Mans.... and the caterham doesn't really think about aerodynamics at all!

also, it can brake so late.

In pure straightline braking I don't see any physical attribute that would suggest better braking than an equally lightweight rectangular car? (neither would it suggest any worse for that matter... so no advantage to either design)...

[P.S.]

... so the question is would the Deltawing create 25% less drag than a rectangular shaped car which is also allowed to use ground effect Tunnels..

Its not THE question! It is yours... Even though I can´t follow most of your numbers, one more example:

Turn it around and say the deltawing has not 25% less drag but 25% more downforce. That would be equal in terms of L/D. If your calculations came near my rFactor Sim, in that case the deltawing concept would destroy the rectangular by miles. I don´t think you took the right approach.

[machin]

Turn it around and say the deltawing has not 25% less drag but 25% more downforce. That would be equal in terms of L/D. If your calculations came near my rFactor Sim, in that case the deltawing concept would destroy the rectangular by miles.

That's a very good point... OK, so what we need to do is figure out how much more downforce (in terms of CdA) is required to equalise the performance of the two car types... I'll have a look at some numbers tonight...

[Giblet]

I never thought I would say this, as the look of the car really bothered me at first.

Its actually growing on me. I feel ashamed

[Pierce89]

I never thought I would say this, as the look of the car really bothered me at first.

Its actually growing on me. I feel ashamed

[img]...[/img]

You should feel ashamed . That is fugly.