FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[racechick]

Virgin are not challenging for podiums but are serious about F1 and want to show well. They have the smallest budget of any of the F1 teams(less than 40 mil). They have saved money by not using a wind tunnel. Wirth reckons that CFD is cheaper and faster and can give more aerodynamic answers than any other technology for the money spent. It also suits Branson's desire to support british technology and his green approach.

Newey reckons CFD is twenty years away from being able to replace windtunnels.

What do you think?

[7UpJordan]

Whilst it remains to be seen if this approach works for Virgin in F1, Wirth's CFD-only method has been tried and proved successful in the Le Mans Series and other formulae.

[stonemonkey]

Virgin are not challenging for podiums but are serious about F1 and want to show well. They have the smallest budget of any of the F1 teams(less than 40 mil). They have saved money by not using a wind tunnel. Wirth reckons that CFD is cheaper and faster and can give more aerodynamic answers than any other technology for the money spent. It also suits Branson's desire to support british technology and his green approach.

Newey reckons CFD is twenty years away from being able to replace windtunnels.

What do you think?

Looks like even those well in the know don't really agree, it might be difficult to make a comparison for the effectiveness of CFD since they have the smallest budget unless they do find themselves ahead of other larger budget wind tunnel using teams.

Do any other teams use CFD at all in combination with the wind tunnels?

[Gaz]

Virgin are not challenging for podiums but are serious about F1 and want to show well. They have the smallest budget of any of the F1 teams(less than 40 mil). They have saved money by not using a wind tunnel. Wirth reckons that CFD is cheaper and faster and can give more aerodynamic answers than any other technology for the money spent. It also suits Branson's desire to support british technology and his green approach.

Newey reckons CFD is twenty years away from being able to replace windtunnels.

What do you think?

Its abit of both.

CFD sytems and Simulators are only as good as the calibration data you put in them.

Alot of the teams will look at a part in the wind tunnel and throw the data on how it behaves at a CFD system to have that calibrate it and develop the part further.

as i understand it anyway..

Nick Wirth has had lot of sucess with cfd in the past in the LMP class, the car he designed the Acura ARX-02a was done desgined in CFD and only scale wind tunnel tested and it won the team championship.

[Rivelution]

Nick Wirth has had lot of sucess with cfd in the past in the LMP class, the car he designed the Acura ARX-02a was done desgined in CFD and only scale wind tunnel tested and it won the team championship.

They had no competition though...

[Denthúl]

Virgin are not challenging for podiums but are serious about F1 and want to show well. They have the smallest budget of any of the F1 teams(less than 40 mil). They have saved money by not using a wind tunnel. Wirth reckons that CFD is cheaper and faster and can give more aerodynamic answers than any other technology for the money spent. It also suits Branson's desire to support british technology and his green approach.

Newey reckons CFD is twenty years away from being able to replace windtunnels.

What do you think?

I think that Newey is biased, although to be honest his bias is caused by the use of an old method that, really, is still very capable. Just looking at the progress Red Bull Racing have made since 2005 is proof of that. As long as you calibrate your equipment and software correctly, CFD is just as good as a wind tunnel and miles cheaper. However, getting that calibration correct is very tricky. Get a number or two wrong and you can end up with a RA107 quite easily...and they had wind tunnels for that one.

I'd like to see how Virgin and USF1 fare this year without any wind tunnel testing, it's perhaps one of the most interesting things on the technology side for me at the moment.

[Jabberwocky]

Does it need to be calibrated to the real world?

as long as you get maximum down force for minimum drag. it does not matter if the numbers are in potatos or onions.

It will however matter when the car comes into production and the spring rate etc is dependent on how much force is being created.

CDF is only as good as the program that is being run and how realistic it is

[headless]

If Newey said it...

[antoniob]

Virgin are not challenging for podiums but are serious about F1 and want to show well. They have the smallest budget of any of the F1 teams(less than 40 mil). They have saved money by not using a wind tunnel. Wirth reckons that CFD is cheaper and faster and can give more aerodynamic answers than any other technology for the money spent. It also suits Branson's desire to support british technology and his green approach.

Newey reckons CFD is twenty years away from being able to replace windtunnels.

What do you think?

The technology clearly holds a lot of promise but like any program you get out what you put in. iow it depends heavily on the data being provided and if you out slightly you could end up with a very bad car/result. Newey has the upperhand at the moment and i agree with him that the technology is a long way from being realised.

[cap-dude]

As far as I know, all teams use a mixture of CFD and wind tunnels.

But only USF1 and Manor are using CFD only. But I'd say CFD only is definitely a disadvantage. It may do thousands upon thousands of calculations, but wind tunnel testing gives real world data. I think Brawn tried a few CFD only parts last year, and they made a pretty bad impression. Plus, lemans is so much less aero dependent that F1. But we'll see what happens next year.

[headless]

As far as I know, all teams use a mixture of CFD and wind tunnels.

[Gaz]

As far as I know, all teams use a mixture of CFD and wind tunnels.

But only USF1 and Manor are using CFD only. But I'd say CFD only is definitely a disadvantage. It may do thousands upon thousands of calculations, but wind tunnel testing gives real world data. I think Brawn tried a few CFD only parts last year, and they made a pretty bad impression. Plus, lemans is so much less aero dependent that F1. But we'll see what happens next year.

Well it depends on what your budget is.

If you had a limit and your choices were build a scale model and wind tunnel test it or try a few more ideas on a CFD system the CFD system might be more cost effective.

on the subject of Newley tho he still does his designs on paper, which are then converted into CFD and wind tunnel tested.

so he's not just at the other side of the fence he's about 5 or 6 fields away.

[Jabberwocky]

If Newey said it...

Suppose.

How many race winning cars has Newey got to his name? Now think about Nick Worth?

[Denthúl]

If Newey said it...

Suppose.

How many race winning cars has Newey got to his name? Now think about Nick Worth?

In Formula One? Nick Wirth has one, I believe.

[Rivelution]

If Newey said it...

Suppose.

How many race winning cars has Newey got to his name? Now think about Nick Worth?

In Formula One? Nick Wirth has one, I believe.

I know this is off topic, but nice sig. I've been remembering the good ole days too, but from an American viewpoint.