(KVRC) CAEdevice

Post here information about your own engineering projects, including but not limited to building your own car or designing a virtual car through CAD.
User avatar
CAEdevice
40
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2014 2:33 pm
Location: Erba, Italy

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

Wich version of the sidepods do you like? :)

I started working on a double floor (like Ferrari F92A) but I had problems with my CFD code so I decided to simplify the aero concept to have e more predictable behavior. Maybe I'll return to double floor solution after completing the CFD analysis.
At the moment the most urgent thing to do is the design of the front wing.

astracrazy
astracrazy
56
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 3:04 pm

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

i really don't know why your getting so bad results. are you sure your setting it up properly? are you using khamsin? My first spec version of my car was getting 4500N out the box, without any adjustments/improvements made.

have you looked at the aerofoil shapes?

User avatar
CAEdevice
40
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2014 2:33 pm
Location: Erba, Italy

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

4500N at 100mph? Impressive!

Yes the wings (especially the rear wing) have been optimized. I still have not enough donwforce from the floor.
The rear wing contributes to the total downforce with about 600-700N at 100mph (44.5m/s).

I'm not using Khasim: I have intalled it but I need to complete the setup. I think I'll be ready after the first or the second rece... in the meanwhile I'll take part to the first race (Monaco?) just to see how it works :)

astracrazy
astracrazy
56
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 3:04 pm

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

thats in my set up though (and with just as much drag). If i put my car in my set up i might get less. My work at the moment is reducing the drag.

User avatar
CAEdevice
40
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2014 2:33 pm
Location: Erba, Italy

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

My car's total drag (max downforce setup, 100mph) is about 1500-1600N

astracrazy
astracrazy
56
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 3:04 pm

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

the thing is us comparing now means nothing because we are running different scenarios, different programs etc etc. The only thing the same is the speed. We won't know until the first race because only then will they be run under an identical scenario

After the first race you'll know roughly where you 1000N puts you compared to everyone else, the same as my 4500N. You might finish above me because in the KVRC scenario you get better results and i get worse. And you'll be able to 'calibrate' your results to the KVRC results so you'll know what your 1000N is worth

Hope that kinda makes sense. Just use your results as a guide for improvement for yourself

a good example is last year i thought i was on the money with the cop, then in the kvrc results i was too far back. so i then knew i had to aim slightly too far forward with my results to get close to the centre in the kvrc results....

User avatar
CAEdevice
40
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2014 2:33 pm
Location: Erba, Italy

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

I have problems with my COP value (2800mm...): it depends on the very bad design of my front wing. I'd like to work on it longer, but I have some work to do in office :)

User avatar
Daliracing
21
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2013 10:19 pm

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

CAEdevice wrote:Wich version of the sidepods do you like? :)

I started working on a double floor (like Ferrari F92A) but I had problems with my CFD code so I decided to simplify the aero concept to have e more predictable behavior. Maybe I'll return to double floor solution after completing the CFD analysis.
At the moment the most urgent thing to do is the design of the front wing.
The ones from your last pics :D

User avatar
CAEdevice
40
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2014 2:33 pm
Location: Erba, Italy

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

Daliracing wrote:
CAEdevice wrote:Wich version of the sidepods do you like? :)

I started working on a double floor (like Ferrari F92A) but I had problems with my CFD code so I decided to simplify the aero concept to have e more predictable behavior. Maybe I'll return to double floor solution after completing the CFD analysis.
At the moment the most urgent thing to do is the design of the front wing.
The ones from your last pics :D
OK, it's a quite conservative design (I admit that the aero concepts is inspired by others teams design)

wesley123
wesley123
228
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 4:55 pm

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

CAEdevice wrote:I have problems with my COP value (2800mm...): it depends on the very bad design of my front wing. I'd like to work on it longer, but I have some work to do in office :)
The way I look at it it looks like the front wing flap is rather cambered. Current F1 cars have an almost straight flap that has some angle of Attack, the flap itself almost has no camber. You might get better results if you try simpler wing setups
"Bite my shiny metal ass" - Bender

astracrazy
astracrazy
56
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 3:04 pm

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

the top side will be flat, but the bottom side will need sum camber to keep the air attached?

User avatar
CAEdevice
40
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2014 2:33 pm
Location: Erba, Italy

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

Official CAEdevice MP001A presentation:

Image

Image

Image

cdsavage
cdsavage
19
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 12:28 pm

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

Looks nice. Does it comply with the second part of K8.1? The engine cover looks paper thin in that area.

User avatar
CAEdevice
40
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2014 2:33 pm
Location: Erba, Italy

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

Yes, it should be complying (the engine cover is large enough to include the trapezoidal shape idefined by the rules) but I'm still a bit confused about some points.

Image

User avatar
CAEdevice
40
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2014 2:33 pm
Location: Erba, Italy

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

Magny Cours setup: small improvements were made almost everywhere.

Image