Mine could be the other car?LVDH wrote:And yes, you were one of two cars that is responsible for the adjustments in the exhaust area but I have to say it was a smart solution.
Mine could be the other car?LVDH wrote:And yes, you were one of two cars that is responsible for the adjustments in the exhaust area but I have to say it was a smart solution.
Not sure if my car is the other one, but if innovative solutions fall within the regulations, why change the regulations? The last thing we need is a set of regulations that end up with cars that all look the same. Lets leave some scope for innovation and new ideas.LVDH wrote:And yes, you were one of two cars that is responsible for the adjustments in the exhaust area but I have to say it was a smart solution.
Yes and no. They will get removed so there is no rule about them anymore.CAEdevice wrote: Thank you for the update. So, can I assume that cooling inlet/outlet surfaces will have a free area for the next race?
I would like to review what I did there but have not found the time. There will be no changes a week in advance of a race.CAEdevice wrote:Will the pressure drop through the heat exchanger (given a flow rate) will remain unchanged?
Yes you are the other car. And yes, I want to see as much innovative stuff here as possible. But when I said innovative about your solution I should have said unrealistic. In my opinion in real live a vital part of your car would fail. But Chris is in charge of the rules and he is not sure yet if this rule has to be modified to outlaw your solution. So your solution might live on.TalnoRacing wrote: Not sure if my car is the other one, but if innovative solutions fall within the regulations, why change the regulations? The last thing we need is a set of regulations that end up with cars that all look the same. Lets leave some scope for innovation and new ideas.
I had a suspicion that my solution may not be too realistic in real life, but I am sure it can be refined to make it more realistic. There are other ways to achieve a similar solution, but I did not have enough time to investigate them and since I am struggling to get MantiumWFlow to work, I could not confirm if the current solution is effective (I hope it works as I intended to). Anyway, lets see what Chris says.LVDH wrote:Yes you are the other car. And yes, I want to see as much innovative stuff here as possible. But when I said innovative about your solution I should have said unrealistic. In my opinion in real live a vital part of your car would fail. But Chris is in charge of the rules and he is not sure yet if this rule has to be modified to outlaw your solution. So your solution might live on.
The going gets tough... =D>LVDH wrote:...we have a new winner.
Since we're no longer doing resubmissions, the simulations can be started soon after the deadline passes, Andre doesn't have to wait for me to finish all of the checks. In the interest of getting the results out sooner, not every entry will always be checked anymore - I check as many of the entries as I can starting with those at the top of the results.Alonso Fan wrote:I have not yet received my legality check, although looking at the detailed table, I have no penalties' so that's good
I see. It's a good way to speed things up.cdsavage wrote:Since we're no longer doing resubmissions, the simulations can be started soon after the deadline passes, Andre doesn't have to wait for me to finish all of the checks. In the interest of getting the results out sooner, not every entry will always be checked anymore - I check as many of the entries as I can starting with those at the top of the results.Alonso Fan wrote:I have not yet received my legality check, although looking at the detailed table, I have no penalties' so that's good