[MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2016

Post here information about your own engineering projects, including but not limited to building your own car or designing a virtual car through CAD.
CAEdevice
19
User avatar
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2014 2:33 pm
Location: Erba, Italy

Re: [MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2016

Post by CAEdevice » Wed Feb 15, 2017 7:17 pm

LVDH wrote:You are right, the values are carry over from the full version but I will remove unnecessary stuff for the new MVRC edition which I will release soon. If you see anything else which should be kicked out just let me know. Removing stuff is easy.
Hi, I can't check it now, but I remeber that there are some wrong units for the pressure resultants (I used the "d" release).

rjsa
64
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:01 am

Re: [MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2016

Post by rjsa » Wed Feb 15, 2017 7:23 pm

Ins't it the HX flow which is single sided and reading Pa*m^2

Thx for looking at the CD and Area stuff.

JJR
2
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 7:02 pm

Re: [MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2016

Post by JJR » Wed Feb 15, 2017 10:25 pm

Hi Matteo this are CdA values for some lmp cars :

Lotus lmp2/2012/CdA 0.90 - avarage mapping
Dome - Pescarolo lmp1/2012/CdA 0.96 - avarage mapping
Pescarolo P03 lmp1(AMR1 based)/2012/ CdA 1,03 - avarage mapping

Lotus used to be fastest lmp2 car on straights.
Pescarolo was open cockpit car and slowes lmp1 car on straights.
Dome was beautiful car :)

CAEdevice
19
User avatar
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2014 2:33 pm
Location: Erba, Italy

Re: [MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2016

Post by CAEdevice » Wed Feb 15, 2017 11:05 pm

Hi JJR, thank you very much for the interesting data. Our cars (the best cars of the last Le Mans race) are significantly less draggy (about 15% less). I use the Done as reference (it is similar our cars).

Which could be the reason? Maybe narrower tyres? Or simplified cooling (no oil nor brake cooling)? Or the porosity of the hx? Just a curiosity.
Last edited by CAEdevice on Thu Feb 16, 2017 10:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

rjsa
64
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:01 am

Re: [MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2016

Post by rjsa » Wed Feb 15, 2017 11:47 pm

Just the clean skin from theoretical cars might count for quite a bit. If we started slicing and dicing panels and adding internal tubing I suppose figures should start changing quite fast.

And like you mention, all the stuff that is simplified or left behind too.

rjsa
64
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:01 am

Re: [MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2016

Post by rjsa » Wed Feb 15, 2017 11:54 pm

How big is the COP handicap? 50mm?

rjsa
64
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:01 am

Re: [MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2016

Post by rjsa » Thu Feb 16, 2017 12:26 am

Back on the wishes:

-Can we get more slices? Half the current spacing?
-Is there something like Surface LIC in the plans?

My old iMac's graphics card crashes 3 times out of 5 I try it with paraview...

JJR
2
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 7:02 pm

Re: [MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2016

Post by JJR » Thu Feb 16, 2017 9:09 am

CAEdevice wrote:Hi JJR, thank you very much for the interesting data. Our cars (the best cars of the last Le Mans race) are significantly less draggy (about 15% less). I use the Done as reference (it is similar our cars).

What could be the reason? Maybe narrower tyres? Or simplified cooling (no oil or brake cooling? Or the porosity of the hx? Just a curiosity.
Our cars are 5000 mm long vs LMP 4650mm (longer car is better ), lmp cars have mandatory cutouts on front and rear wheel arches and 15mm mandatory rear wing gurney. Also numbers are for avarage ride hight mapping in rake situation so about 35/55 mm and KVRC car is simulating with 45/45 - no floor rake. And lmp car have also stepped floor.
So I think lmp carhas these disadvantages and yeas we are missing brakes cooling, cockpit ventilation ....

CAEdevice
19
User avatar
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2014 2:33 pm
Location: Erba, Italy

Re: [MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2016

Post by CAEdevice » Thu Feb 16, 2017 11:09 am

JJR wrote:
CAEdevice wrote:Hi JJR, thank you very much for the interesting data. Our cars (the best cars of the last Le Mans race) are significantly less draggy (about 15% less). I use the Done as reference (it is similar our cars).

What could be the reason? Maybe narrower tyres? Or simplified cooling (no oil or brake cooling? Or the porosity of the hx? Just a curiosity.
Our cars are 5000 mm long vs LMP 4650mm (longer car is better ), lmp cars have mandatory cutouts on front and rear wheel arches and 15mm mandatory rear wing gurney. Also numbers are for avarage ride hight mapping in rake situation so about 35/55 mm and KVRC car is simulating with 45/45 - no floor rake. And lmp car have also stepped floor.
So I think lmp carhas these disadvantages and yeas we are missing brakes cooling, cockpit ventilation ....
Thank you very much! These points are very interesting.

rjsa
64
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:01 am

Re: [MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2016

Post by rjsa » Fri Feb 17, 2017 5:03 pm

Code: Select all

Force Coefficients averaged: Cd: 0.733444, Cl: -3.54725, Cl(f): -1.65669, Cl(r): -1.89056
So I'm going to consider my 2016 test mule retired. L/D = 4.830, uncorrected COP 1.60m & HX flow 3.6m^3/s.

Anxiously expecting the new rulebook :wink:
Last edited by rjsa on Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

CAEdevice
19
User avatar
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2014 2:33 pm
Location: Erba, Italy

Re: [MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2016

Post by CAEdevice » Fri Feb 17, 2017 5:40 pm

rjsa wrote:

Code: Select all

Force Coefficients averaged: Cd: 0.733444, Cl: -3.54725, Cl(f): -1.65669, Cl(r): -1.89056[m^3/s]
So I'm going to consider my 2016 test mule retired. L/D = 4.830, uncorrected COP 1.60m & HX flow 3.6m^3/s.

Anxiously expecting the new rulebook :wink:
You are on the podium : )

Markus
0
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 6:35 pm

Re: [MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2016

Post by Markus » Sat Feb 18, 2017 11:25 pm

Reading through these last pages has made me interested in the new season. I was just wondering what CAD programs you use since I realize Sketchup really can´t keep up with more professional programs?

CAEdevice
19
User avatar
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2014 2:33 pm
Location: Erba, Italy

Re: [MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2016

Post by CAEdevice » Sun Feb 19, 2017 9:02 am

Hi Markus, welcome to the MVRC challenge.

I am not a fan of Sketchup, but consider that Variante won a challenge modeling its car with Sketchup.

The best alternative is parametric CAD, if you are a student you could try a student edition (free or around 100$/year) of Solidworks, SolidEdge, Autodesk360, ...

FreeCAD is opensource, not at the same level as commercial tools but quite good in my opinion.

Also take a look at OnShape demos.

Consider that the opensource car that I will realease for MVRC 2017 could be managed and tweaked with SketchUp and even with simpler tools as the 3D builder provided with Win10.

rjsa
64
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:01 am

Re: [MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2016

Post by rjsa » Sun Feb 19, 2017 10:53 am

I use Rhino3D + T-Splines.

Markus
0
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 6:35 pm

Re: [MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2016

Post by Markus » Sun Feb 19, 2017 4:35 pm

CAEdevice wrote:Hi Markus, welcome to the MVRC challenge.

I am not a fan of Sketchup, but consider that Variante won a challenge modeling its car with Sketchup.

The best alternative is parametric CAD, if you are a student you could try a student edition (free or around 100$/year) of Solidworks, SolidEdge, Autodesk360, ...

FreeCAD is opensource, not at the same level as commercial tools but quite good in my opinion.

Also take a look at OnShape demos.

Consider that the opensource car that I will realease for MVRC 2017 could be managed and tweaked with SketchUp and even with simpler tools as the 3D builder provided with Win10.
That open source car sounds interesting, I did take part in KVRC a couple of years ago using sketchup but spent quite a bit of time trying to get the basics working which meant that it wasn't really possible to do any proper development.



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CCBot [Bot] and 1 guest