(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.
Post Reply
User avatar
CAEdevice
45
Joined: 09 Jan 2014, 15:33
Location: Erba, Italy
Contact:

(KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

Image

Hello everyone, this is my first year so I have developed a very rough model with which to test some ideas. I hope to improve a few things in the next two weeks.

astracrazy
31
Joined: 04 Mar 2009, 16:04

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

looks good. looks like you got some 1 or 2 ideas there

User avatar
CAEdevice
45
Joined: 09 Jan 2014, 15:33
Location: Erba, Italy
Contact:

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

I'm going to send you the car for evalutating the nose respect of the rules, even if the front wing-plates are completely approximate.
I've found quite difficult to comply with the section area (120000mm2 and 50000mm2) fo the side pods.
The nose 2014 rules don't impact deeply on the downforce, on the contrary the absence of the rear beam plate seems to be quite important.

A confirmation: is it right that the lower part of the floor (central part) is about 30-40mm from the ground? I would expect F1 were nearer to the floor.

astracrazy
31
Joined: 04 Mar 2009, 16:04

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

The sidepods were expected to be bigger this year and we also got some very unrealistic small sidepods last year. So this was sort of voted upon as the best way. With your design it will be harder to hit the regs, so you'll need to find some sort of compromise (after all thats what it's about) maybe make them wider?

the nose rules will give you more front downforce, so the cop will move forward. The challenge is balancing this out and getting more from the rear. As you say, the beam wing and shallower rear wing make this harder. A good diffuser would work wonders

that sounds about right. It would be much lower, its just something carried over from last year. I presume there was a reason why, maybe to do with the cfd or something.

User avatar
variante
131
Joined: 09 Apr 2012, 11:36
Location: Monza

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

Oh, well done!
Can't see much, but the rear wing seems to be nicely made, which is promising.

User avatar
CAEdevice
45
Joined: 09 Jan 2014, 15:33
Location: Erba, Italy
Contact:

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

Well... the rear wing works quite well, but the diffuser is not working at all

User avatar
CAEdevice
45
Joined: 09 Jan 2014, 15:33
Location: Erba, Italy
Contact:

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

New release: downforce is still too low, but it's legal at least (except for the nose pillars)

Image

astracrazy
31
Joined: 04 Mar 2009, 16:04

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

i notice you don't really have any aerofoil shapes going on with your flaps. Those little winglets as well will be giving you drag and not much downforce as they will prob be stalling.

User avatar
CAEdevice
45
Joined: 09 Jan 2014, 15:33
Location: Erba, Italy
Contact:

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

Yes, I actually don't have any idea about wich airfoil design to adopt, so I'm using simplyfied profiles now and I'm planning to run a CFD optimization of the flaps in the next weeks (in the meanwhile I'm studying airfoil theory...)

The biggest problem now is to make the floor work. I'm trying a lot of different diffuser design, but I'm still computing no more than 100kg of downforce generated by the floor and diffuser.

astracrazy
31
Joined: 04 Mar 2009, 16:04

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

just a basic shape will do

Image

I wouldn't worry too much about the diffuser at the moment. There's no point working on different designs when your not maximizing the flow to it. Try and work getting as much clean air to it as possible then work on your design.

User avatar
CAEdevice
45
Joined: 09 Jan 2014, 15:33
Location: Erba, Italy
Contact:

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

Yes, it seems to works better than my approximation :)

About the floor/diffuser: I extimate that it should generate about 40-60% of the total downforce (depending on the setup), what do you think about?

astracrazy
31
Joined: 04 Mar 2009, 16:04

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

well, maybe for f1 but i think we'd be lucky to achieve that

with some good simple clean wings using some aero shapes you'll make better progress. Look at f1 2009 cars for simple wings. Your getting complex without starting simple so you don't know whats not working.

User avatar
CAEdevice
45
Joined: 09 Jan 2014, 15:33
Location: Erba, Italy
Contact:

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

Yes I agree :)

User avatar
CAEdevice
45
Joined: 09 Jan 2014, 15:33
Location: Erba, Italy
Contact:

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

The performance is still ridiculous (less than 1100N at the speed of 100mph, I really couldn't do better) but for a while or at the end (because of some things I need to resolve at work), this is the car.

Image

User avatar
Daliracing
4
Joined: 16 Sep 2013, 23:19
Contact:

Re: (KVRC) CAEdevice

Post

nice car i like the shape of the side pods :D

Post Reply