Audi LMP1 Discussion - Page 23

**FIRE** · 11 Dec 2010, 10:03 (Ref:2802879)

I like it (except for the the fin of course

)

deggis · 11 Dec 2010, 10:08 (Ref:2802881)

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemansfan

They are not crazy .D'ont believe that the figures on the Monitors are truth .

I'm not that supid but MulsanneMike certainly didn't disregard them totally.

erale · 11 Dec 2010, 10:16 (Ref:2802884)

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemansfan

They are not crazy .D'ont believe that the figures on the Monitors are truth .

I rather guess they're coefficient of drag/lift multiplied by frontal area. Especially the coefficient of drag would be way to high.

I checked the values for the 2008 Formula Master car which had the following values:

Medium Downforce config:

Downforce (SCz) 2.16
Drag (SCx) 0.7

These values are the coefficients of downforce/drag multiplied with the frontal area.

Jamesy-18 · 11 Dec 2010, 11:45 (Ref:2802903)

Isn't Audi making a big mistake by not taking it to Sebring?

As proved with the R15, surely the best Audi can do is to get lots of experience of racing conditions with the new car on the run up to Le Mans.

By using the R15+ at Sebring, they are limiting that time available to them, especially if Peugeot use their new car at Sebring.

911targa · 11 Dec 2010, 12:59 (Ref:2802927)

im wondering whether R15++ is going to be a close-top

anyway is there any possible that Bernhard and Dumas both become Audi factory drivers follow Rockenfeller or Luhr and some DTM Audi drivers like Scheider for Porsche in return?

CTD · 11 Dec 2010, 13:32 (Ref:2802932)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jamesy-18

Isn't Audi making a big mistake by not taking it to Sebring?

As proved with the R15, surely the best Audi can do is to get lots of experience of racing conditions with the new car on the run up to Le Mans.

By using the R15+ at Sebring, they are limiting that time available to them, especially if Peugeot use their new car at Sebring.

Well taking the car to early on the track can be just as foolish, it will take important test time away. Audi can probably do 3x 24hours test in the time it takes to ship, race and ship back the R18. And when the car is still "Young" you can solve problems better and faster under test circumstandses, than under the very limited time when racing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 911targa

im wondering whether R15++ is going to be a close-top

anyway is there any possible that Bernhard and Dumas both become Audi factory drivers follow Rockenfeller or Luhr and some DTM Audi drivers like Scheider for Porsche in return?

No fitting a roof to the R15 would mean building a new tub, which would need homologation and a lot of new aero parts. And that amount of work is insane for only 1 race!

P38 in workshop · 11 Dec 2010, 13:36 (Ref:2802934)

Quote:

Originally Posted by pdxracefan

If it was built to win LeMans, and I'm sure it was, then remember the pits are on the right side of the track there. The drivers don't have to run around the car to change.

The track is essentially clockwise-with a few twists-if you were racing a sidecar outfit,the lunatic's (sorry passenger's) weight would be applied to the right more times than the left.In a car,the driver stays put and his weight will do more good on the right.There may also be a benefit during driver changes.

gttouring · 11 Dec 2010, 13:39 (Ref:2802935)

the big fin solution holding up as a wing support is inspired, it makes it certainly more useful and nice to know about...cleans it up.
a closed top r15+? i haven't heard anything myself, that might be cool, and with the engine that monster has, very cool

gttouring · 11 Dec 2010, 13:41 (Ref:2802936)

Quote:

Originally Posted by CTD

No fitting a roof to the R15 would mean building a new tub, which would need homologation and a lot of new aero parts. And that amount of work is insane for only 1 race!

ahem- LeMans , cough 1 race cough

Simmi · 11 Dec 2010, 14:10 (Ref:2802942)

Quote:

Originally Posted by gttouring

ahem- LeMans , cough 1 race cough

Yeah but it's not for Le Mans. It's for Sebring.

I'm sure there might be some data they can gleam from the race with the R15++, whether it be tyres or something new internally. I'm sure they will maximise what is a less than ideal situation.

MulsanneMike · 11 Dec 2010, 14:11 (Ref:2802943)

Quote:

Originally Posted by erale

I rather guess they're coefficient of drag/lift multiplied by frontal area. Especially the coefficient of drag would be way to high.

I checked the values for the 2008 Formula Master car which had the following values:

Medium Downforce config:

Downforce (SCz) 2.16
Drag (SCx) 0.7

These values are the coefficients of downforce/drag multiplied with the frontal area.

Yes, indeed if the case, then my numbers need to be divided by 1.8 (the assumed frontal area I'm using). When that is done, we have much more "sane" figures:

.cd= .471
.clTOTAL= 1.8798

Therefore we're looking at around 934 lbs drag for 3727 lbs DF. As the relationships are all the same, still 3.99:1 L/D

knighty · 11 Dec 2010, 15:35 (Ref:2802964)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

Is there something particular related to the powertrain regulations which forced both the diesel behemoths to go to pretty massive roof-mounted air intakes?

The roof mounted intake is almost entirely a result of mounting the turbo(s?) in the V of the engine, I'm pretty sure this has been done in a big attempt to reduce drag, I'm sure that time will prove that pug have also done the same thing, as this is a common trick for V engines in road cars, BMW now do it on all their V-diesels and V-gasoline engines.......it makes the sides of the engine very packaging friendly, not to mention reduces frontal area

MulsanneMike · 11 Dec 2010, 15:50 (Ref:2802971)

Quote:

Originally Posted by knighty

The roof mounted intake is almost entirely a result of mounting the turbo(s?) in the V of the engine, I'm pretty sure this has been done in a big attempt to reduce drag, I'm sure that time will prove that pug have also done the same thing, as this is a common trick for V engines in road cars, BMW now do it on all their V-diesels and V-gasoline engines.......it makes the sides of the engine very packaging friendly, not to mention reduces frontal area

Marshall Preutt is saying the roof intake is for the intercoolers (?!). The inlet area is tiny for that application! Thus they must be for the turbo(s) until I see (with my own eyes) otherwise. To draw the air from the roof for an intercooler makes no sense anyway considering the gaping holes in the side pods to do just that. Not to mention, diesel intercooling requires lots of air...

CTD · 11 Dec 2010, 16:00 (Ref:2802973)

Quote:

Originally Posted by gttouring

ahem- LeMans , cough 1 race cough

I think Audi wants to use the R18 for that race - ahem!
Please get your facts straight before using sarcasm

CTD · 11 Dec 2010, 16:08 (Ref:2802974)

Quote:

Originally Posted by gttouring

ahem- LeMans , cough 1 race cough

Quote:

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

Marshall Preutt is saying the roof intake is for the intercoolers (?!). The inlet area is tiny for that application! Thus they must be for the turbo(s) until I see (with my own eyes) otherwise. To draw the air from the roof for an intercooler makes no sense anyway considering the gaping holes in the side pods to do just that. Not to mention, diesel intercooling requires lots of air...

You could mount an extra intercooler and reduce the side pods to minimize drag. Otherwise there is the hybrid system which Aldi requires cooling.
But yes turbo inlets seems to be the case, although the roof inlet seems smaller than the two on the R15 combined.

CTD · 11 Dec 2010, 16:13 (Ref:2802977)

How much may Audi actually modify the R15+ without adding the fin?

Lipp · 11 Dec 2010, 17:01 (Ref:2802992)

I have a general question, will the fin be giving more sideways stability, will the cars be quicker through the corner as a result? I know all cars need one because of ACO rules in order to control flipovers. What will happen when there is a steady sideway wind blowing across the straight?

MulsanneMike · 11 Dec 2010, 17:38 (Ref:2803006)

Have a confirmation that the roof inlet is for engine (NOT intercooler) and that the nose inlet is for driver cooling (NOT turbo induction).

nickyf1 · 11 Dec 2010, 18:36 (Ref:2803025)

Quote:

Originally Posted by The359

I wonder, since the inside of the front fenders appears to still be the "bolt on" addition, is it possible that, if the wide front tires plan fails as it did on the Acura, the R18 fenders could be easily modified to fit the narrower normal tires?

The R15+ had the exact same style part, I believe it just comes down to the construction of the part and minimising the amount of bodywork over the inside edge of the wheel/tyre.

92scotland · 11 Dec 2010, 18:37 (Ref:2803026)

I love what Audi have done here. IMO the fin looks alright. They have incorporated it into the design so it doesn't look too out of place and after a while it'll just become the norm just like the twin roll hoops. I don't know how important or significant this is but whilst I looked at it from this angle I noticed that there is only one air intake on the top of the sidepod. As I said I don't the significance and just decided to bring it up

.

nickyf1 · 11 Dec 2010, 18:42 (Ref:2803028)

Does the fin have to be on the centreline (Z-axis) of the car? I just have no idea how the open top cars are going to incorporate the fin into their design without blending it into an existing rollhoop.

MulsanneMike · 11 Dec 2010, 18:54 (Ref:2803039)

Quote:

Originally Posted by nickyf1

Does the fin have to be on the centreline (Z-axis) of the car? I just have no idea how the open top cars are going to incorporate the fin into their design without blending it into an existing rollhoop.

They'll do it as so:

http://www.mulsannescorner.com/2011LolaLMP2-1.jpg
http://www.mulsannescorner.com/2011LolaLMP2-2.jpg

JAG · 11 Dec 2010, 19:08 (Ref:2803045)

Quote:

Originally Posted by CTD

How much may Audi actually modify the R15+ without adding the fin?

The ACO have said grandfathered cars will be at a performance disadvantage so unless they fit the smaller engine their only hope is reliabilty, like the R8 vs Pescarolo in 2005.

Oreca aren't using a fin on their new P2 as it's based on the P1 tub, that suggests you can do pretty much what you like.

knighty · 11 Dec 2010, 19:20 (Ref:2803051)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

Marshall Preutt is saying the roof intake is for the intercoolers (?!). The inlet area is tiny for that application! Thus they must be for the turbo(s) until I see (with my own eyes) otherwise. To draw the air from the roof for an intercooler makes no sense anyway considering the gaping holes in the side pods to do just that. Not to mention, diesel intercooling requires lots of air...

your completley correct, this type of engine will require a lot of intercooler air flow......I will be gob-smacked if its not the engine intake, I think what they are actually doing is creating a very efficient ram-air diffuser duct, which converts flow into pressure and the restrictor is actually mounted on the intake throat of the turbo volute with a cone filter around it, which is quite a traditional layout for a turbo engine.........excellent analysis on your site by the way, nice zoom-in on the aero numbers!!!

gwyllion · 11 Dec 2010, 21:46 (Ref:2803100)

Q & A: Audi's Ullrich on new R18 (autosport.com)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
[WEC] Porsche Prototype Discussion	Simmi	North American Racing	9260	5 Mar 2024 20:32
[WEC] Toyota LMP1 Discussion	Gingers4Justice	ACO Regulated Series	6771	18 Aug 2020 09:37
Nissan LMP1 Discussion	Gingers4Justice	Sportscar & GT Racing	5568	17 Feb 2016 23:22
How about a LMP1 Pro & LMP1 Privateer class	Holt	Sportscar & GT Racing	35	6 Jun 2012 13:44
[LM24 Race] Audi LMP1 Poster all art deco'd.	blackohio	ACO Regulated Series	2	27 Oct 2011 06:30