[MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2023 (Grand Prix Cars)

[Schifty]

I will be in this season, but i want to know with wich software the part provided can be open. Because i have Blender but i cant open any of them ?!

But sincerely i think something is missing for new comers. I mean almost each season, thats pretty much same people so you all know how to...

I think a quick tuto about how to convert provided file to any 3d software and 3d software to a valid participing files can be very usefull.

Blender should be able to import stl files if i remember correctly. Also there is a blender addon called STEPper for importing step files. Earlier days on this competition i used 3ds max and then shifted to Fusion 360. There is lots of free cad softwares (freecad, onshape, fusion 360) that can do the job.

About the tutorial part, i dont think any of us have the time or motivation to do a "how to". There is litteraly dozens of cad systems - 3d modeling softwares to cover. Just import the parts and follow the rulebook.

Tuto part was only about, converting to proper files, but thats fine, finally find out at least to use provided files.

[Schifty]

I will be in this season, but i want to know with wich software the part provided can be open. Because i have Blender but i cant open any of them ?!

But sincerely i think something is missing for new comers. I mean almost each season, thats pretty much same people so you all know how to...

I think a quick tuto about how to convert provided file to any 3d software and 3d software to a valid participing files can be very usefull.

Blender should be able to import stl files if i remember correctly. Also there is a blender addon called STEPper for importing step files. Earlier days on this competition i used 3ds max and then shifted to Fusion 360. There is lots of free cad softwares (freecad, onshape, fusion 360) that can do the job.

About the tutorial part, i dont think any of us have the time or motivation to do a "how to". There is litteraly dozens of cad systems - 3d modeling softwares to cover. Just import the parts and follow the rulebook.

Tuto part was only about, converting to proper files, but thats fine, finally find out at least to use provided files. Just there is no place on the website said use freecad to open the provided files.

The tuto can be only :

1- Download provided files from website
2- Install Freecad
3- Open up ''file.name'' with freecad
4- You want to use other 3d software to built car, just export from freecad to a .obj

Nothing much

[CAEdevice]

Blender should be able to import stl files if i remember correctly. Also there is a blender addon called STEPper for importing step files. Earlier days on this competition i used 3ds max and then shifted to Fusion 360. There is lots of free cad softwares (freecad, onshape, fusion 360) that can do the job.

About the tutorial part, i dont think any of us have the time or motivation to do a "how to". There is litteraly dozens of cad systems - 3d modeling softwares to cover. Just import the parts and follow the rulebook.

Tuto part was only about, converting to proper files, but thats fine, finally find out at least to use provided files. Just there is no place on the website said use freecad to open the provided files.

The tuto can be only :

1- Download provided files from website
2- Install Freecad
3- Open up ''file.name'' with freecad
4- You want to use other 3d software to built car, just export from freecad to a .obj

Nothing much

You could try "import function" on FreeCAD. This is the page Google proposed me:

https://wiki.freecad.org/Import_from_STL_or_OBJ

Anyway, if you use FreeCAD it would be better to import the STEP version.

https://wiki.freecad.org/Manual:Import_ ... _filetypes

[LVDH]

The CAD file should contain a FreeCAD file, step files and stl files.

[LVDH]

Based on some of the feedback, I have received through various channels, I have made a new version of the CAD files. They are available for download. Mainly we have nicer wheels and a simpler engine model.

[variante]

Based on some of the feedback, I have received through various channels, I have made a new version of the CAD files. They are available for download. Mainly we have nicer wheels and a simpler engine model.

Do you confirm the RV_Vehiclebody will be kept narrow at the back (cooling outlet area)? Or should we expect F1 width (to help us meet the imposed F1 cooling requirements) in a future update?

[LVDH]

That part will stay as it is. What I am surprised about is that there has been zero discussion about the reduced cooling performance. I figured to slightly decrease it to account for cooling flows delivered through the intake above the drivers head.

[yinlad]

That part will stay as it is. What I am surprised about is that there has been zero discussion about the reduced cooling performance. I figured to slightly decrease it to account for cooling flows delivered through the intake above the drivers head.

It's definitely a step in the right direction. The cooling requirements are still the limiting factor in being able to design more advanced bodywork though. I still maintain the rad porosity isn't free flowing enough

[LVDH]

I have always said, I am open to data proving that we are on the wrong side. Do a miracle and send me pressure loss data of a core used in F1.

We are getting close to another success for MVRC:

Not sure if I can get it released tomorrow, though...

[yinlad]

I have always said, I am open to data proving that we are on the wrong side. Do a miracle and send me pressure loss data of a core used in F1.

We are getting close to another success for MVRC:
https://mantiumchallenge.com/wp-content ... w_rake.png
Not sure if I can get it released tomorrow, though...

Is an 'accurate' flow rate or encouraging creativity better for the competition though?

[variante]

Very cool. I'm looking forward to testing the ride heights.

Anyway, the rims are still relatively flat. On the top of this image are Alfa Romeo wheels from last year, on the bottom MVRC.
Notice the depth of the sculpt around the wheel nut.


Also, the new MVRC gearbox (in yellow) doesn't fit into last year's Alfa Romeo chassis (as well as last year's MVRC cars).
Design freedom suffers from it, as well as our ambition to reach F1 performance.

I am open to data proving that we are on the wrong side.

You might have guessed F1 cooling requirements perfectly, but not allowing wide cooling outlets at the same time is a dissonance.
In other words, our narrow rulebox cuts 10% of the cooling capacity, so why don't we have 10% lower cooling requirements?

Then, again, there's the fact that F1 teams have armies of engineers to satisfy such cooling requirements while keeping an elegant bodywork. We don't. So if you want to see elegant/realistic bodyworks in MVRC, you should lower the cooling requirement.

[Ft5fTL]

Also, the new MVRC gearbox (in yellow) doesn't fit into last year's Alfa Romeo chassis (as well as last year's MVRC cars).
Design freedom suffers from it, as well as our ambition to reach F1 performance.
https://i.imgur.com/QZr9yyY.png

I designed that gearbox after importing the Alpine car from f1 22 game. I can always lift that up if that is what the rulemakers want but i dont see that as a big problem as the front suspension. If we are looking for reaching the f1 levels of performance, the front suspension should be redesigned. instead of generating moderate amount of downwash, ours generate upwash that leads to loss of both cooling performance and floor performance.

[CAEdevice]

I don't know what was the evolution of suspensions this year, but consider that in F1 they have limits about the incidence of the front wing airfoil, so they have less upwash issues. With a downwash suspension design, we would have a huge separation (separation is already present but it is partial).

The ideal solution would be to allow a specific suspension design, that would depends on the specific front wing design... or simply the opposte: the suspension is neutral (so it was in 2022) and the front wing is modeled to work with a neutral front suspensions airfoil.

[beschadigunc]

I don't know what was the evolution of suspensions this year, but consider that in F1 they have limits about the incidence of the front wing airfoil, so they have less upwash issues. With a downwash suspension design, we would have a huge separation (separation is already present but it is partial).


The ideal solution would be to allow a specific suspension design, that would depends on the specific front wing design... or simply the opposte: the suspension is neutral (so it was in 2022) and the front wing is modeled to work with a neutral front suspensions airfoil.

You are right there is no way around it. In f1 the suspension is such a key design component aerodynamically that each section of the suspension has a different aoa and positioning , so that the fw and the suspension talks together. By us with a prescription suspension this really limits the frontwing complexity , i would say just give us a box where we have to put 5 sticks and let us innovate

[BlueCheetah66]

Would it be morally wrong to exploit the fact the Vehiclebody RV goes below the Floor Body RV?