F1technical.net

I've only received the compliance check email and no results too.

Same for me

I have received the results: It seems I am the only one.

I have results

I can't wait to see the results of the the race 1, but I think I will be around 4th place

I hope that the date of the next race will not be delayed, I am leaving the day after the submission date (it is also possible that I will have to skip race 3, in that case I will use the same car as race 2).

Meanwhile, I was thinking about an old request about OCCFD: it would be very useful to have a simmetry bc, it would allow a finer mesh with the same cpu time or half the time (and ram requirements) with the same mesh refinement.

Can you use the front diffuser to feed to sidepods for cooling and be successful?
That is, meet minimum cooling requirements as to not incur a penalty?

Yes, more ore less in my car the cooling inlets are located in order to receive the flow from the front diffuser.

I have received compliance check but no results but I did have to resubmit.
In a rush to resubmit, i did forget to check a rule and put an additional cooling outlet in the wrong spot and ended up with a penalty..

Hopefully, with my new cooling solution, i might get 100% power

graham.reeds wrote:Can you use the front diffuser to feed to sidepods for cooling and be successful?
That is, meet minimum cooling requirements as to not incur a penalty?

Theoretically (and in CAEDevice's reality) you can probably get about 9m^3/sec going under the front diffuser (2m wide by 0.1m high by 45m/s)... More than enough for cooling... But it depends on what the configuration is after the diffuser whether enough of that flow goes to the cooling..... How big your inlets are, how much goes to the rear diffuser, how much goes down the sides of the car... I think on the introductory car you HAVE to feed air over the top of the front diffuser (so it is more of a wing-in-ground-effect than a pure diffuser) in order to get enough flow for cooling whilst also taking those other flow paths into account....

I tried a front diffuser that was similar in profile to the rear one (double deflection Variante style) and it dropped engine power from 100% to 40% on the intro class car. Will have to investigate trying to control the airflow after the diffuser as the front downforce level was much better than what I had previously

RicME85 wrote:I tried a front diffuser that was similar in profile to the rear one (double deflection Variante style) and it dropped engine power from 100% to 40% on the intro class car. Will have to investigate trying to control the airflow after the diffuser as the front downforce level was much better than what I had previously

I too tried this with my own car and got the same result only 40% power. My new design also tries to mimic the double inflection diffuser but i now have my intake right at the front of the car. I hope with further development i can get a decent amount of downforce from it. The only concern is still getting enough air under the car to produce good down force at the rear.
Post processing in OCCFD has not been working for me so i have only been able to go off the colour on the front and rear diffuser and i looks like the rear is only producing about half that of the front.

I'm disappointed with the results. I had around 30 Pa.m2 surface integral pressure on my analysis but instead of that i got - 320 Pa.m2 on the official results.

Hi, I was still thinking about a way to make the rule check and simulation process faster.

From my point of view the re-submission would not be allowed. Minor issues should be solved before the next race and a penalty would applied in case of big issues (influencing the results) and minor issues previously listed.

The pre season race would help very much (so it was for my car) and a single bonus (re-submission) would be allowed once in the season.

My proposal would make convenient to re-use a previuos checked (and simulated) car if the team is not 99.9% sure about performance and rule compliance.

CAEdevice wrote:Hi, I was still thinking about a way to make the rule check and simulation process faster.

From my point of view the re-submission would not be allowed. Minor issues should be solved before the next race and a penalty would applied in case of big issues (influencing the results) and minor issues previously listed.

The pre season race would help very much (so it was for my car) and a single bonus (re-submission) would be allowed once in the season.

My proposal would make convenient to re-use a previuos checked (and simulated) car if the team is not 99.9% sure about performance and rule compliance.

I'm OK with removing the resubmission process (but allowing the use of a legal entry from a previous round) if everyone else is happy with this. It wouldn't be a huge reduction in compliance checking time, since we're getting 15 entries each round and usually 3 or 4 resubmissions, but it would get rid of the few days of waiting for those entries to be resubmitted.

The rest of the simulation results for round 1 should be going out now.

Gets my approval.

Oh yeah... And if I or anyother entrant forgets to enter a car in a round, can the previously submitted car be used for results... Unless the entrant SPECIFICALLY states that they want to withdraw their team from the competition. It would mean going on holiday doesn't ruin your championship, and means the entrant numbers stay high throughout the season...