F1technical.net

CAEdevice wrote:

RicME85 wrote:what are we naming the monitoring surface inside the heat exchanger?
Has WFlow been updated to work with the new rule changes?

If you put a generic "mid-surface.stl" in the monitoring surface folder it works.

(I don't use the GUI)

Are you putting left and right in the same STL?

Does WFlow run ok without the inlet and outlet surfaces?

cdsavage wrote:In case anyone missed the email, there's about 11 hours left until the deadline. Let us know if you didn't receive the reminder email.

Last email I received was 9.15 on 22 Oct. Correct?

RicME85 wrote:

CAEdevice wrote:

RicME85 wrote:what are we naming the monitoring surface inside the heat exchanger?
Has WFlow been updated to work with the new rule changes?

If you put a generic "mid-surface.stl" in the monitoring surface folder it works.

(I don't use the GUI)

Are you putting left and right in the same STL?

Does WFlow run ok without the inlet and outlet surfaces?

Wflow will compute the flow through each surface placed in the monitoring surfaces folder. Inlet/outlet surfaces are not needed.

RicME85 wrote:what are we naming the monitoring surface inside the heat exchanger?
Has WFlow been updated to work with the new rule changes?

As no update was needed it works perfectly fine (I hope).
And you can call it whatever you want. Of coarse Chris and I appreciate meaningful names.

RicME85 wrote:

cdsavage wrote:In case anyone missed the email, there's about 11 hours left until the deadline. Let us know if you didn't receive the reminder email.

Last email I received was 9.15 on 22 Oct. Correct?

Yes, was just a reminder.

OK, so my new racecar, the TR-16C is submitted for the Sepang race. It is a big evolution based on the TR-16B that raced at the Nurburgring, with new front aero, new sidepods and a new diffuser. Balance is still not perfect, but simulation results are positive, so I'm hopeful it will finish higher up the order.

Files uploaded. I think this time everything should be OK regarding orientations and scales, thanks to the GUI this made my life so much easier!

Now the mandatory picture. I have been working on this concept for a while, but it was really difficult to implement with the older rules. Compared with the rest of entries that have posted mine is a little extreme on the drag reduction, but according to the lap time simulator I might have a chance.
Most difficult part has been CoP control. I think it is inherent to the concept, because really small changes in the rear generate insane changes in the front. According to my last simulation I am within 5cm of the 1.65 target, so I should be ok.

I can't see as much as I wanted from the picture, but it looks an interesting car.

At Sepang it will be all about efficiency.

Hi RicME,
I just checked the submitted cars yours is not there yet!
I have:
-CAEdevice
-TF
-TalnoRacing-
-Pure Power Racing
-MercuryMotorsport
-SHM Racing

AratzH wrote:Files uploaded. I think this time everything should be OK regarding orientations and scales, thanks to the GUI this made my life so much easier!

Now the mandatory picture. I have been working on this concept for a while, but it was really difficult to implement with the older rules. Compared with the rest of entries that have posted mine is a little extreme on the drag reduction, but according to the lap time simulator I might have a chance.
Most difficult part has been CoP control. I think it is inherent to the concept, because really small changes in the rear generate insane changes in the front. According to my last simulation I am within 5cm of the 1.65 target, so I should be ok.

https://s22.postimg.org/5anaaz5ox/Captura.jpg

The TF car looks very cool, if I see correctly and he has the cooling in the front. This is actually the very first concept I was working on last year with the first MantiumRacer. Getting it to work the these outer template rules was very difficult, but almost possible. I think the idea is promising because the air in front of the heat exchangers is slowed down to almost stagnation which should cause a high pressure on the surface in front, the splitter if you want. Now without the outer exit templates you can still have a front diffuser configuration. This should help a lot in creating enough front down force.
Another very interesting aspect on this car is the missing rear wing. If he can generate enough downforce with the diffuser he should have a well balanced and very efficient car.
This car is for me a candidate for victory.
Maybe tomorrow I can dig out some images of the first MantiumRacer. It would be cool to compare the two cars.

I tested a similar configuration too: I abandoned it beacuse I had not the possibility to refine it between Race2 and Race3, but maybe I can consider it in the future. At the moment the classical solution gives a sligthly better efficiency.

I had problems with the big area of the heat exchangers: the cooling flow was above 4m3/s but I could not reduce the heat exchangers size (what about a lower minimum area?).

Maybe I can post some pictures after I put the kids to bed.

This was the car I tested:

I was wondering: can the heat exchanger volume be considered enough to hide the front suspension in frontal view, as required by the rules?

CAEdevice wrote:I was wondering: the heat exchanger volume can be enough to hide the front suspension in frontal view, as required by the rules?

Its something I have looked in to doing.

CAEdevice wrote:I was wondering: the heat exchanger volume can be enough to hide the front suspension in frontal view, as required by the rules?

yes my hx on my KVRC car covered the front suspension template.