[MVRC] Mantium Virtual Racecar Challenge 2022 (Grand Prix Cars)

[G-raph]

So we have two late cars. However, I noticed that we never got CFD images from the last race. So here you go:
https://mantiumchallenge.com/wp-content ... images.gif
https://mantiumchallenge.com/cfd-images ... mvrc-2022/

Thank you for the CFD pictures! Top surface with large scale is not the most useful, but they are interesting nonetheless.

[variante]

So we have two late cars. However, I noticed that we never got CFD images from the last race. So here you go:
https://mantiumchallenge.com/wp-content ... images.gif
https://mantiumchallenge.com/cfd-images ... mvrc-2022/

Ah yes, so refreshing to see a proper CFD comparison!
The rear wheels of Tolo stand out. They seem to be receiving some sweet wake from the front tires.

https://i.imgur.com/ppKsDaJ.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/gd5ZXPc.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/dxwKr88.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/cAUep2K.jpg
I didnt go for some crazy design choices on this one so i expect a fully legal car this time Expected Cl/Cd is around -2,6. This one has more downforce than some of my LMP cars back in the day.

Another nice looking car (this is the one i prefer tbh), and those numbers are promising.

I've made another good step, should have enough cooling and beat all of the R02 cars. But I said exactly that last time, and everyone made the same or a larger step than me. So I'm looking forward to finishing 5th again!

Here is my Race 03 car. Visually minor changes everywhere, the most obvious difference is giving up my cooling chimneys . I may do a post about that someday.

https://i.postimg.cc/tTCx6Kkq/grr-r03.jpg

Good luck everyone!

Oh no! Where are the chimneys?? No more throwback to 2008 cars...

[TalnoRacing]

This is my car for round 3. Managed to improve efficiency, but still struggling to get 100% cooling.

[CAEdevice]

This is CAEdevice's car for Race03, I am not entirely satisfied with the performance:



(yes, still wings 2022 compliant, I'm an idealist)

[yinlad]

R03 car, not 100% happy or certain of CoP. It's a struggle to fit in a 5000 iteration mvrc_long run to confirm it with my setup and with how the CoP migrates around depending on fast/long/iterations it's been tough to lock it down to an educated guess. I've only got as far as 2500 mvrc_long and we're at a Cl/d of 2.4, hoping to see 2.6 by the time everything is said and done on 5000 iterations but we'll see!

[LegendaryM]

Everyone looks like they've made a good step! I'll post my updated car soon, I've just been a bit busy with work recently.

[variante]

Here's the car for COTA.
I expect higher efficiency and much higher downforce. I won't be surprised if -by the end of the season- someone gets past CLA 5.
I updated: Front Wing, Wheel Deflectors, Floor Leading Edge, Diffuser, Beam Wing and Rear Wing. The FW gave me bad headaches...
As you can see, i'm not strictly following FIA rules anymore.

[CAEdevice]

Nice cars.

Who is using 2500 or 5000 iterations? I could not use the fast template for race 3, because it is not suitable for "fine tuning", everything has been done with the "standard" MVRC template of MFlow.

[spacehead3]

Who is using 2500 or 5000 iterations? I could not use the fast template for race 3, because it is not suitable for "fine tuning", everything has been done with the "standard" MVRC template of MFlow.

I have started using the standard template now, fast template seems to be leading me in the wrong direction with the floor at this point. Unfortunately standard takes almost 24 hours to run and I don't like to tie up my PC for that long, so my progress as slowed quite a bit. My car really didn't like the low DF Monza setup, should at least be a bit more competitive this time.



And yeah, all these cars are looking great!

[G-raph]

Here's the car for COTA.

Lovely car and renders! You scare me a bit with your -5Cl story though...

Who is using 2500 or 5000 iterations? I could not use the fast template for race 3, because it is not suitable for "fine tuning", everything has been done with the "standard" MVRC template of MFlow.

I have started using the standard template now, fast template seems to be leading me in the wrong direction with the floor at this point. Unfortunately standard takes almost 24 hours to run and I don't like to tie up my PC for that long, so my progress as slowed quite a bit. My car really didn't like the low DF Monza setup, should at least be a bit more competitive this time.

Same here. I have run the Standard MRVC setup only once, with "only" 2000 iterations, and it took 24h. So I'll never run this again, but at least it has given me a useful correlation point with my setup.
Which is :

- By default, run the whole car with MRVC_Fast with 3 layers, no "high res" surfaces and 1000 iterations.
- For detailed Rear Wing development, run as above but with the rear wing in the high res folder.
- For Front Wing development, run only the front end (see picture below), with same settings as above except with 5 layers and the front wing in the high res folder.



I am only going after the flowfield and/or large steps of Cl (at least 0.1) so I feel this setup gives me good enough results.

But clearly, if you want to extract every last 0.01Cl bit of performance and optimise every little detail, particularly vorticity under the floor, then you have to run the Standard or Long MRVC setup with at least 2500 iterations.

[LegendaryM]

As you can see, i'm not strictly following FIA rules anymore.

Nice to see 'the gloves are off'

Anyway, here's my car for this round, I have done quite a bit of development, but spent a lot of time on the sidepods when its probably easier to find performance elsewhere. As others have said, I've had to switch to the MVRC template as the Fast template didn't really give reliable results.

[yinlad]

As you can see, i'm not strictly following FIA rules anymore.

Nice to see 'the gloves are off'

Anyway, here's my car for this round, I have done quite a bit of development, but spent a lot of time on the sidepods when its probably easier to find performance elsewhere. As others have said, I've had to switch to the MVRC template as the Fast template didn't really give reliable results.

I'm envious of your modelling ability on your sidepods. I'm desperate to redo mine but it was such a nightmare to even get where I'm at now

I thought I'd share some streamlines of the cooling on the car now, I'm pretty happy with the flow now, it's a lot tidier than previous rounds with the sidepod and louvre changes. Though it may be slightly under 3m/s, the aero gains are a worthwhile compromise

[Ft5fTL]

I must say, i really dislike this narow nose trend. People talked my rear wing mount that has zero effect on performance for a whole page like it is a big deal but no one talks about this obvious violation of the rules that can help gain good chunk of time. I dont think it is structualy realistic on the current gen of cars. There is no way that a racing car with todays standarts can get past the crash tests, fit steering racks, fluid reservoirs etc on these noses and have reasonable weight distribution.

[yinlad]

I must say, i really dislike this narow nose trend. People talked my rear wing mount that has zero effect on performance for a whole page like it is a big deal but no one talks about this obvious violation of the rules that can help gain good chunk of time. I dont think it is structualy realistic on the current gen of cars. There is no way that a racing car with todays standarts can get past the crash tests, fit steering racks, fluid reservoirs etc on these noses.

This wasn't a problem last time we ran the championship as there was a mandatory 'crash structure' the nose had to cover. But I do think for next year something along those lines should return.

[CAEdevice]

I must say, i really dislike this narow nose trend. People talked my rear wing mount that has zero effect on performance for a whole page like it is a big deal but no one talks about this obvious violation of the rules that can help gain good chunk of time. I dont think it is structualy realistic on the current gen of cars. There is no way that a racing car with todays standarts can get past the crash tests, fit steering racks, fluid reservoirs etc on these noses and have reasonable weight distribution.

I agree, I would have expected a minimum section area somewhere.

On the other side, the mandatory structure behind the airscope is definetly too large, It should have rounded edges to keep these dimensions