This is my entry for Monza:
Low downforce wings, new floor, new rear deflectors, and as usual; tweaked sidepods.
Not me quietly on 300 so farvariante wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2024 2:59 pmAs anticipated, only the wings have been changed for the upcoming Monza race.
You'll notice that this isn't a "minimum drag" configuration, but rather "mid-low". Hopefully, the relevance of braking and cornering performance will be enhanced by the official laptime simulator, compared to the one we're given.
https://arcvstudio1.wordpress.com/wp-co ... ront-1.png
https://arcvstudio1.wordpress.com/wp-co ... rear-1.png
Interesting sidepods from PurePower. It seems like the "RedBull intake" is becoming dominant. And a front wing with just 2 foils makes a lot of sense on low drag configurations.
Opposite approach from CAEdesign, but his drag and efficiency were already good at Silverstone, so I'm sure he'll be a strong contender.
G-raph is conservatively mirroring last year's configuration. Well, it worked last time!
150 simulations to develop the car is a healthy amount (isn't that much more than last year?).
I'm near enough, at 131. Maybe I'll run a few more for the last race, but I won't invest much more time in this Season.
Yes, can confirm and we even have another new team. Always great to see how more and more people get interested.The Rusted One wrote: ↑Mon Sep 02, 2024 6:27 pmYes I submitted it, hopefully you guys received it on your side
Did you just turn up with a full F1 floor edge wing? I'm curious to see how much of it is left with the coarse mesh, and how you kept that legal in an X-plane, but that is some very impressive work.
Yes, it was 93 last year. However, I have changed my approach. Last year each simulation was a large geometry change, often in multiple areas of the car at once. This year the geometrical steps were much smaller, and always isolated to a single component. So it feels like I have spent much less time on CAD this year.
I'm with you on that one, I feel Variante's "mid-low" level is risky. However, given he starts with a higher base efficiency he'll probably get away with it.yinlad wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2024 6:56 pmNot sure I share your optimism for a mid-low setup, Monza is just so insanely drag biased. More so without a DRS aspect of the lap simulation. I think this race could be very open reading into last year's results and depending on how it shakes out the championship might be VERY interesting going into R05
Yepp, I am also pretty happy with how they look.
Given the results show 0.3 m3/s of the required 2.8 m3/s, your cooling flow is falling foul of;Dodgy_Malaka_69 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2024 2:57 pmHey, I just checked the video and it says my car is DNF for cooling issues. I am aware that it was 158,000 instead of 180,000. But the submission mail says that first few violations will result in added time. I just want to know why I was DNF'ed instead of extra time being added.
Congrats to all on the podium! Not quite the shake up I expected and for me the new sidepods have regressed on cooling correlation between the MVRC template I run and the long one for official results, but in the end it probably only cost me a position. So long as I do what I need to for the final race P3 in the championship should be doableAppendix 2: airflow requirements for inlets and outlets:
"Not meeting cooling requirements leads to reduced engine power and to DNF below 50% of required value."
Your sidepod looks very nice but when I saw the tiny inlet and outlet I knew you would be in trouble with cooling. Meeting the cooling target is quite a frustrating part of the process, but don't give up! Hopefully you can get it sorted for the next race.yinlad wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2024 3:22 pmGiven the results show 0.3 m3/s of the required 2.8 m3/s, your cooling flow is falling foul of;Dodgy_Malaka_69 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2024 2:57 pmHey, I just checked the video and it says my car is DNF for cooling issues. I am aware that it was 158,000 instead of 180,000. But the submission mail says that first few violations will result in added time. I just want to know why I was DNF'ed instead of extra time being added.
Appendix 2: airflow requirements for inlets and outlets:
"Not meeting cooling requirements leads to reduced engine power and to DNF below 50% of required value."
It seems like I uploaded the wrong engine cover. You can see the difference between the images I published and the official ones. I suppose that's what causing the car to be off balance (on top of non-perfect sim correlation).
Haters will say it's because the car was off balance