I am EarlQ partner. I am the aero guy who does the aero development and CFD. Also looking at purchasing an FRS....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shankenstein
EarlQ, the world is a better place because of your work. If you'd be willing to distribute your solid model, I (and others) would be glad to improve it and run a heap of simulations. I'm a MechE that primarily works with Pro/E, and so-so with SolidWorks and Inventor. Minimal CFD, but some magnetic and stress FEA work. If it's validation, we can do that... but I imagine the primary benefit will be identifying "hot spots" and testing solutions for both Eco and Track purposes. Alot of smart folks on here with similar interests
|
PM me if you are interested in making a solid model. I can give you a good starting point to work from. I just cannot distribute the model we are currently using. We use Creo/ProE but also have a lot of experience in SolidWorks. Glad to see some other engineers on here with interest in racing cars!
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasklein
This is a great thread! I'm excited to follow it!
What are you guys using for your CFD sim? I'm definitely interested in seeing the results.
One thing to note about CFD: its not actual "real life" data. Its one of the most ground breaking additions to the design and testing process, but its still a simulation. It's a big misconception that its 100% (or even 99+%) accurate to real conditions. Its all about the software, the 3D model, and how the programmer/aerodynamicist sets everything up.
In the end you still have to get it on the track or in a "real" wind tunnel...
|
We are using OpenFOAM. Basically we use creo/proE for the cad model, then OpenFOAM for the pre-processing and solver, and then paraview for post-processing. We run this on a linux workstation. Depending on the analysis and its requirements, runs can take anywhere from 12-36 hours.
Correct that cfd is not "real life." It is an experiment with conditions that do not change to get repeatable results. It is in no way 100% and that is a big misconception. However, it can definitely drive quality design changes that drastically improve performance. Most automotive cfd models are very simplified because of computing time and it won't drive design changes on a big scale. How it is set up makes a big difference. I have validated our program and setup using automotive test of ahmed bluff body and a class 8 heavy vehicle (GCM). Both have data from university for validation of setup and program.
Also windtunnels are not "real life" either. That is also a big misconception. It is also just an experiment to get repeatable results that represent what is going on in real life (just like cfd). Both are doing the same thing, just in different ways.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimman
Are all those models the same quality?
There is a GT86 and even an AE86 in the Toyota section.
I've started looking into building a desktop for this and may have some questions for you in a few months.
Thank you very much for sharing!
|
Not all the models are of the same quality. However, the models still need to be reworked anyways to make them watertight for cfd purposes. If you have any questions on computer hardware or cfd in general, let me know in this thread or pm. I am happy to help :happy0180: