F1technical.net

why would you make a rule up that avoids C32 style sidepods when they clearly are legal and work

probably i should have said "smaller than Sauber...".
But honestly i wouldn't like to see every car with microscopic sidepods: they wouldn'd give me the impression to be F1 car anymore. Also, it wouldn't be as trycky as it is with bigger sidepods and we would end all with identical sidepods (=less fun IMO)
But yeah, that's more a matter of personal taste...we can discuss it later.

What turbulence model does Khamsin use?

@cdsavage: the turbulence model is k-omega SST.

Thanks a lot for all the suggestions. We had approx 38 teams registered, but only 12 designs submitted. This is one of the reason why we are not limiting the number of entrants to 10-15 - but the downside is that we could have had 38 designs
submitted.

To keep you up-to-date on the status: all designs have been setup for the 180 mph analysis. One of them is currently running to check that the setup is correct. Later today, I will start the simulation for the remaining ones (provided that the first one ran smoothly). Once all have run the 180 mph ok, the other two cases will be setup.

One of the option for next year could be to use open entries for the first two races and then have the best 10 teams racing for the rest of the season, with more races. Any opinion?

We do need your help:
- Could you send us render of your design for the website gallery (do include your team name, KVRC and our two sponsors: Sabalcore and Tasman Machinery)?
- Exposure, exposure, exposure: please do help us in getting exposure. This will help in getting sponsors next year.

Julien:

not a bad idea. Perhaps you could do that if say 38 teams submit, otherwise if like this year only 10-15, just carry on

Hi all, does anyone know how big the gaps are in between the elements in the front wing and rear wing?

Thanks Dan.

theres no set gap, just what works best. some overlap as well

There is for the rear wing - see 3.10.2.

i stand corrected. Rear wing the gap must be between 10 and 15 mm

i always use 10 mm for front and rear any way

A little while back someone was asking a similar question for a real wing he was building for his car....

http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... f=6&t=8370

it seems a flap gap of between 2 and 3% of the main element's chord length is "normal".... i.e. pretty small....

The problem with the gap here is not some related to some "golden rule", but it's mostly dependent to the mesh size used in the CFD simulations: if the mesh size is under Xmm, every hole or gap smaller than that will be closed. I don't know the exact mesh size, but a while ago i asked it to Julien and he told me it was used (something like) 15,7mm during the Monaco test race, and that he would have tried to improve that number.
Of course we can't expect anything much less than 10mm, otherwise each simulation would take days.

Hi,

Things are running on schedule apart from one bit, which is 2 cars do not have water tight meshes, so I have done some mesh repair on those cars (many hours of work!) so that is running things a little behind where we would like to be at the current moment.

Thanks
Nick

One thing people haven't mentioned but what I will be interested to see is just how good is the KVRC car?

yes, we will sim the KVRC car after all the cars are all done, so we dont eat into deadline time, so the KVRC car data will come most likely a week later,

Were there any rules compliance issues with any of the cars? It would be good to know ASAP so there is enough time to make changes.