Khamsin Virtual Racecar challenge 2013 (CFD model racing)

[astracrazy]

i'm not to fussed about which tracks we use, as long as there are 4 or 5

what i do want to know is the plan. Now nick has gone, who will be bringing this altogether and running the competition? I know Julien is about but he is busy with his own business as well, and who will be testing the cars are legal per race?

[julien.decharentenay]

@astracrazy I will be doing some of the leg work, but from my perspective the sticky point is F1 related stuff - regulations, CAD, etc. As you pointed out, the major one is testing car legality.

Would it be possible for someone to undertake this role, be part of the competition (in that they can design and submit) but not part of the final score? Would someone be interested? An alternative could be to have teams judging each other design legality - but that sounds a bit tricky to administer. Any opinion?

Calendar: my question relates more to timing and frequency of the races. I think that we will be able to shorten down the turn around between submission of the design and race results from the CFD + Virtual Stopwatch perspective to around 3-4 days - this would exclude legality assessment. I would propose start of season in April 2014 and race every three week.

@n12ck We are in for the CFD refinement. I will send you an email with further details. We will keep you updated on how it is going.

[astracrazy]

see pm, i'll be more than happy

[variante]

Tracks and Calendar:
Monaco, Magny Cours, Monza, Silverstone, Nordshleife (in a similar order, since we have high DF settings for the first two, low for the 3rd and 4th, and the last one is just the best way to close the season )

Julien suggested to start from April with a cadence of 3 weeks. However this solution would put the end of last race in the middle of July, which is the worst ever imaginable moment of the year for me. This is why i propose, by purely egotistical considerations, to anticipate the start of the season to March, while keeping the same cadence, so:
start: March, end: June. For a total of 5 races, one every 3 weeks.

Technical stuff:
i'm building the engine as well: i say let's compare at the end the best one for our purposes. I'm also building Tub, Gearbox, rear crash structure and, if needed, suspensions complex. I'm doing this following a scheme released by Ferrari.

Marketing:
All i could do by this point of view is trying to contact some of the italian car manifacturer or motorsport suppliers, hoping to achieve some kind of sponsorship. Oviously the chances of success are pretty much 0...but you never know...

[astracrazy]

variante:

The competition could well start in March

I agree if anybody has created an engine, gearbox etc then they can put them forward and they can be voted on which is used for the competition

[wigglez28]

Sorry I haven't been active for ages now but i've been very busy with my GCSE's and a long travel time (1hr 20mins each way) to my new college has meant I have been unable to take part in the competition up until now. However I would still really like to take part in the 2014 season even if there is a charge involved. I only have one demand for the new season and that is not to allow Adrian Newey or Sebastian Vettel anywhere near it! Anyway looking forward to starting with my car in the next few weeks.

[julien.decharentenay]

Ok. Here is my to-do list:
- Update website;
- Start gathering the regulations and parts into a central download on the website with mention of contributions;
- Draw up a "proposed" calendar with aim to finish by end of June;
- Add a pre-registration form for the 2014 season.

Marketing: the 2014 season will aim to be self-founded. I am after someone that is happy to prepare (and distribute) press-release and spreading the word about the challenge. Ideally someone keen to write blurb(s) on the aero benefits of x and y design aspect would be great.

[julien.decharentenay]

And (I forgot):
- do CFD setup refinement study

[julien.decharentenay]

Calendar: The following is based on Variante's suggestion:

Monaco (Monte Carlo): Submit by 6th March, race results: 15th March
Magny-Cours (France): Submit by 27th March, race results: 5th April
Monza (Italy): Submit by: 17th April, race results: 26th April
Silverstone (Britain): Submit by: 8th May, race results: 17th May
Nürburgring (Germany): Submit by: 29th May, race results: 7th June

Prospective calendar is online at: http://www.khamsinvirtualracecarchallenge.com/calendar - Yes I have to change the banner...

Machin, do the tracks look achievable from a Virtual Stopwatch perspective?

We are aiming to have the races run as follows:
- Submission on Thursday;
- Assessment of car legality between Thursday and Sunday;
- Feedback on compliance to teams on Sunday;
- Re-submission of non-compliant design by the following Wednesday;
- Analysis of compliant and re-submitted designs between Monday and Sunday.

The above is to avoid having to introduce time penalties for non-compliance. It will be a tight and intense schedule.

[cdsavage]

My preference would be for longer gaps between races. Otherwise it all looks good.

Regarding the spec parts - while the engines posted earlier look great, really they are just there to define volumes to build bodywork around, so I don't think it would be a major problem to re-use the parts from 2013. I think the more important issue is defining the volumes for the cooling system.

[astracrazy]

actually i agree with you, it really doesn't matter what they look like because they are in closed in bodywork anyway

What do people think about the following regarding spec parts anyway:

a) Any spec parts will be supplied with the rule boxes (as last year).

b) Instead on an engine being supplied, the position of the engine is defined (same position as last year) and just minimum dimensions. This way if people want to just draw a cube and put it there they can, if people just want to use last years they can, or if people want to use ones they have already created they can.

c) Suspension, gearbox/rear crash structure and wheels/brake ducts supplied as normal

d) A radiator is supplied and must be placed within the sidepod area but can be rotated to any angle you wish?

[variante]

About sidepods:
Guys, i think it's totally absurd to be forced to build the sidepods around some mandatory radiators. Remember Mclaren's U-pods or Toro Rosso's double floor-pods? Well, if we choose this solution, we won't be allowed to use any of those shapes.
So why don't we simply use the solution i suggested a while ago, which was the introduction of a minimum area for a cross section (or two, if needed) which must be placed at a given distance from the rear wheel centre line.

About the proposed regulations:
There's another secondary thing: i've read more deeply the provisional regulations kindly offered by cdsavage, and i fail to understand why "K5" states that the nose tip should be placed between 1200 and 1000mm from the front axle. The actual F1 regulations has got "750"mm as the lower limit. What's the reason for this restriction? I would go back to the official regs.

[cdsavage]

I've changed the K5 rule to 800 in the latest draft (the area 50mm rearward of the tip needs to be >=750mm forward of the FWCL, hence 800mm for the tip). There is a small issue in that the regulation boxes should technically change shape depending on the length of the nose, so if I make the boxes correct for a nose at 1200mm, then an 800mm nose will have a bit more legal area than it should have. Not a major issue but something to keep in mind.

I agree on the sidepods, my preference would be to impose a rule on cross sectional area at a distance behind the sidepod inlet, something like:

More than X mm from the car centerline and more than 75mm above the reference plane, the area formed by an intersection with a plane Y mm rearward the sidepod inlet and normal to the car centerline must be more than Z mm^2.

Making measurements like that may be difficult in sketchup though.

[variante]

Thanks for your work. And yes, the different measures allowed for the same element make things complex, but we could solve that through a simple 2D drawing (same issue goes for the survival cell).

[julien.decharentenay]

I just wanted to say that your work and assistance with the challenge is very appreciated. Big thanks to you.