Is it more work doing geometry or CFD?
Can you post specifications of your PC/ work station that you used for this?
CAD causes more, since it includes: read regulaction, create regulation's control volume/surface/limits, then draw the geo.
The PC for CAD is using i7-9700K, has 8 cores.
2x xeon gold 6134 (8cores, base 3.2Ghz, turbo 3.7Ghz,cache 24,75MB)
Not sure... You can use a simple CFD task to test.
when turbo starts?
What CAD program did you use for the model? Parametric, polygonal?
Definitely these 3 would definitely be interesting. A lot of "copy team A" you can see trends but not really their flowfield - plus Vanja already did some of that - to me the big picture things are more interesting.vorticism wrote: ↑Sat Apr 02, 2022 12:50 amWhat CAD program did you use for the model? Parametric, polygonal?
Might be fun to see:
-Model run in reverse flow, maybe 200kph, to see how much lifting capacity it has if spun 180*
-Various positive rake angles to see what angle of attack would be needed to make the car go airborne during an impact
-duplicate the model and test following distances (drafting)
-Mercedes sidepods effects
-Mclaren bib/t-tray effects (vs. what looks like RB18 version in your existing model)
-put a non-flat road surface to simulate riding the curbs (gap from floor to road increases), Mick Schumacher crash comes to mind
-omit the front wheel fairings/wings (do they actually do much?)
-Red Bull stacked beam wing effects
-Test a Monaco spec with the biggest wings you can fit in the legality volumes
-Test a large version of the Ferrari sidepods (essentially make the largest sidepods that can fit in the legality volumes)
By “big picture” are you talking about how the aero works as a whole, how different parts interact or where the bigger gains are coming from?jjn9128 wrote: ↑Sat Apr 02, 2022 7:32 amDefinitely these 3 would definitely be interesting. A lot of "copy team A" you can see trends but not really their flowfield - plus Vanja already did some of that - to me the big picture things are more interesting.vorticism wrote: ↑Sat Apr 02, 2022 12:50 amWhat CAD program did you use for the model? Parametric, polygonal?
Might be fun to see:
-Model run in reverse flow, maybe 200kph, to see how much lifting capacity it has if spun 180*
-Various positive rake angles to see what angle of attack would be needed to make the car go airborne during an impact
-duplicate the model and test following distances (drafting)
-Mercedes sidepods effects
-Mclaren bib/t-tray effects (vs. what looks like RB18 version in your existing model)
-put a non-flat road surface to simulate riding the curbs (gap from floor to road increases), Mick Schumacher crash comes to mind
-omit the front wheel fairings/wings (do they actually do much?)
-Red Bull stacked beam wing effects
-Test a Monaco spec with the biggest wings you can fit in the legality volumes
-Test a large version of the Ferrari sidepods (essentially make the largest sidepods that can fit in the legality volumes)
As opposed to the minutiae of design variations between teams. Because that's so dependent on getting the whole system working.