[MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2017

[LVDH]

It's looking good!

What templates are in the free tier?

Am wondering the same thing

Downloading and testing only costs your email address:
http://mantiumflow.com/demo/

The FIA getting involved would be good but then also the rules will be written in French, which is not so good.

This is why I was so quiet and neglected so many things lately:
www.MantiumFlow.com

You will notice that I am again experimenting with the online support tool. If you guys prefer this, then I can make a switch. The current one for the Challenge page is good, but somehow I do not get emails anymore when new questions pop up.

Wow! That is very impressive! I might be interested in this on a professional level. How could/should I contact?

I spent some time on the contact form and many buttons pointing you towards it. If you cannot find it, you can use the message system here on the forum. You probably have my email address though.

Returning to MVRC: I was wondering if there are news about the HX rotation. In my opinion, a good compromise would to allow only 5 positions:

- current one, normal to the flow
- rotation of +/- 45 degrees with respect to the y axis
- rotation of +/- 45 degrees with respect to the Z axis).

It should be easy to specify one of the 5 vectors in a text file (it would be enough to provide a file with all 5 vectors, asking to erase unused ones)

This is an open point that is annoying me as well. The thing is that in the full version it is possible to work with tilted radiators. However the user needs to supply a vector defining it. I am not sure that everyone here could do it correctly. Also Chris and I have to check if you radiators comply with the rules. If it is facing frontal like now that is very easy. As soon as they get rotated in more than one direction it gets complicated. Best might be allowing rotation only around one axes and only with discrete values. I will think about it the next days.

[RicME85]

Have put some work in for the next race and Im seeing good results. The latest simulation I ran gives me a laptime that would be good enough for 4th last season at Nurburgring. If I can get anywhere near that with the expected improvements teams have made that will be very pleasing and would IMO be a great advert for the intro class

[LVDH]

This sounds very good. I hope you can share a bit what you did. Did you notice that the intro class has less power and the lap time simulator has a drop down menu for that? I do not want to take your achievements away but exact numbers are always good to have.

[RicME85]

Yeah I know it has that, unfortunately the reduced power does drop the time down from 4th to 7th on last seasons timings. If I was to make a minute modification to the supplied parts so that the car would be entered into the full class things would be very different. The intro class powertrain loses 13.83secs over the full class one with the numbers I have.

[LVDH]

13s is not too bad. The track is very long. Keep in mind that the reduced power comes with reduce cooling demands. That is why we took that choice.

[RicME85]

Need to invoke my curfew joker
Can't get out of bed to zip up and send my submission.

[Alonso Fan]

this is the last race that i'm going to use my flawed car. i'm just stumbling upon hurdle after hurdle, and I don't understand what's happening with the flow (contours would be great in the pp). next race or the one after i'll have another new car based on the standardised bodywork. I've not decided whether to drop down to intro yet

[Ft5fTL]

I managed to gain around 10 sec's on Nurburgring. Sadly i need 10 more for getting anywhere near to the podium

Here is some quick screenshots from 3D Builder.

[CAEdevice]

I submitted the car yesterday: just a couple of tweaks to avoid the minor legality issues and a bigger front wing.

I am not happy with it, I could not solve some balancing problems I found after changing the solver, but it is my fault: it will be the last race with this car (the new one has the same layout but it is significantly different in the front wing region) and I was not enough motivated to steal hours from office and bed (lack of ideas contributed too) ...

@Ft5fTL : I am not sure that all the "big" will repeat the same performance of Monaco and your car looks improved...

[RicME85]

Looks like Ft5fTL drove the car into two F1 cars and stolen their monkey seats in the process

[Alonso Fan]

Just submitted, but my car has serious cooling issues with the changes I made. didn't have enough time to redo the cooling ducts to help the situation so i'm left with probably 50% or less engine power

[Ft5fTL]

@Ft5fTL : I am not sure that all the "big" will repeat the same performance of Monaco and your car looks improved...

Dunno about that. With the changes got around 1.5 Cl extra downforce and better CoP values but i dont think you guys will drop that dramaticly.

Looks like Ft5fTL drove the car into two F1 cars and stolen their monkey seats in the process

Actually i had a solution like CAEdevice's Monaco car with 4 monkey seats on one side. Didnt worked out though

[variante]

Here is my car for the Nurburgring race

Incredibly, this version has been tested even less than the Monaco version, for a total of 0 times.

I was trying to correct all of the design flaws that the Monaco car had (following CFD reports indications), but then I changed my mind at the last minute, seeing that I wasn´t really going anywhere...) and redesigned most of the car. I prefer to risk it all...more fun!

It features a new front end: the radiators have been moved to get some room for a multi element Front Diffuser and for a bigger Front Wing. Front Wheel arches have also been redesigned for that purpose. Hopefully I´ll finally gain some front downforce...
The rear end of the car has been slightly fine tuned, while the Rear Wing is in its "medium downforce" configuration.
Overall the car is in "medium-high downforce" (as it was in Monaco because of balance problems...), and efficiency has been considered this time, even though the Nurburgring still pretends loads of downforce.
But again, the car has never been tested.

BTW very nice car I´m seeing this year. All the contenders seem in great shape TF is particularly worrying with its incredible efficiency.
Great to see that the new guys are doing pretty well already!

Also, nice to hear that MantiumCAE has launched its own product!

[etsmc]

Had to make a quick last minute resubmission as I forgot to include a file in my original submission.

Quick question here.
If I have run a simulation with a basic body with no wings and have the results if I then add a rear wing can I simply take the new results and subtract the original results to find out how much the rear wing has added or removed from the car?

say the original no wing simulation had a
cd=0.4
cl=0.7

simulation with a rear wing had
cd=0.5
cl=1.2

could it be assumed that the rear wing values would be
cd=0.1
cl=0.5
giving the rear wing a cd/cl of 5?

[variante]

Had to make a quick last minute resubmission as I forgot to include a file in my original submission.

Quick question here.
If I have run a simulation with a basic body with no wings and have the results if I then add a rear wing can I simply take the new results and subtract the original results to find out how much the rear wing has added or removed from the car?

say the original no wing simulation had a
cd=0.4
cl=0.7

simulation with a rear wing had
cd=0.5
cl=1.2

could it be assumed that the rear wing values would be
cd=0.1
cl=0.5
giving the rear wing a cd/cl of 5?

Yeah but that´s just an approximation. The wing interacts with the body of the car, so the Cd and Cl that you have gained have been produced by the wing AND the rest of the bodywork together. The actual values of the wing itself would be different. But I think that, for your purposes, that calculation is good enough.