An interesting question (to me, at least :-)) is how the energy used in wind-tunnel testing compares with that used in CFD? And, therefore, whether you could reasonably just impose a MJ limit and allow the teams to allocate it as they see fit. (Or, maybe you could go wider and just limit the energy into the design centre. If that encouraged them to add solar panels, or a wind turbine, so much the better, though an on-site oil well or coal mine should clearly be outlawed!)
-- Jim James Cownie <[email protected]> Mob: +44 780 637 7146 http://skiingjim.blogspot.com/ > On 14 Oct 2015, at 22:02, Greg Lindahl <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 08:40:27AM +0100, John Hearns wrote: >> Interesting article on HPCwire >> >> http://www.hpcwire.com/2015/10/07/formula-one-debates-cfd-only-future/ >> >> i don;t see it myself - wind tunnels are an important part of the aero >> engineers toolbox, and they don't run them for fun. > > I totally expect it. Wind tunnels can validate the model for a single > car, but what everyone really wants to know (as of ~ 8 years ago) is > what happens with two cars, which is much closer to the real > environment in a F1 race. > > And doing two half-scale cars in a wind tunnel, that's going to be a > huge wind tunnel... not affordable for any F1 team's budget. For > boundary condition reasons, it's going to have to be more than 2X the > width of a one-car tunnel. Ouch. > > -- greg > > > _______________________________________________ > Beowulf mailing list, [email protected] sponsored by Penguin Computing > To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit > http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
_______________________________________________ Beowulf mailing list, [email protected] sponsored by Penguin Computing To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
