OAK Racing

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by BRG

Here is somthing I posted on May 1st on another thread

"Sam at Racecar Engineering has this on his site (from lm testday)

CORNER TIMES
The following times are not a complete sample, but were taken at the first right hand sweep of the Porsche Curves.

http://www.racecar-engineering.com/e...al-report-lmp/

The Pescarolo 01 no 15 (oak) is the 2nd quickest overall.
We already know that that car was the quickest petrol vmax.
We also see that Oak says they did many 2 lap stints and were not interested in lap times.
What is this cars potential?"

Mike if you think the car is very trimmed out how do you explain the Pescarolo corner speed?
BRG

Too small of a sample I think. Need to look at the entry to the following curve to get a better idea. But, if the Pesca 01 is carrying substantial downforce it means only one thing; drag will be higher and therefore they are producing even more power than estimated. The Oak car did 326 km/h. That's only 12 km/h slower in a straight line than the 908. I'm pretty confident a competitive .cd (or Cx) for a closed top car is less than .45. So for a open top car, which we know will be generating a higher .cd to produce nearly the same top speed means power. The frontal area advantage for the open top car isn't enough to offset the increased drag.

[Gingers4Justice]

There's quite a bit of discussion in other threads about this team, I think they deserve their own thread now.

It looks like this team is really going places and they certainly don't seem short on the Euros compared to their petrol rivals. Could they possibly surprise us all with a top petrol finish at Le Mans?

An interesting place to start a thread is on the techinical developments the team has made to their Pescarolos. An Aston thread has turned into OAK discussion and BRG posted this:

Originally Posted by BRG

Here is somthing I posted on May 1st on another thread

"Sam at Racecar Engineering has this on his site (from lm testday)

CORNER TIMES
The following times are not a complete sample, but were taken at the first right hand sweep of the Porsche Curves.

http://www.racecar-engineering.com/events/technical-report/le-mans-test-day-technical-report-lmp/

The Pescarolo 01 no 15 (oak) is the 2nd quickest overall.
We already know that that car was the quickest petrol vmax.
We also see that Oak says they did many 2 lap stints and were not interested in lap times.
What is this cars potential?"

Mike if you think the car is very trimmed out how do you explain the Pescarolo corner speed?
BRG

Good find from BRG and it certainly looks promising for them. Can we expect big things?

[JAG]

They are certainly very commited, but I didn't consider them potential front runners, at least not with their Pescarolo based car, but they look to be making big strides forward.

The new rear wing shows they're thinking out of the box!

[gwyllion]

The crash of Matthieu Lahaye from the on-board camera of Elton Julian in the Genoa Racing FLM:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzL2cEOyqoY

[The Badger]

Originally Posted by JAG

They are certainly very commited, but I didn't consider them potential front runners, at least not with their Pescarolo based car, but they look to be making big strides forward.

The new rear wing shows they're thinking out of the box!

What the hell is THAT ?!?!?!

Looks like a jelly mold !!!

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by The Badger

What the hell is THAT ?!?!?!

Looks like a jelly mold !!!

It's a very clever rules workaround. Regulations mandate a 20mm rear wing flap gurney. This gurney must be perpendicular to a line that connects the highest point of the wing at the leading edge to the trailing edge. By locally increasing the height through what are huge bumps, the line goes nose up which in turn backs the gurney out. There's probably some loss from the bumps, but I'm guessing it's more than made up for by the backed out gurney. Here's an image I sketched up:

http://twitpic.com/4ryfzg

All the talk about whales and vorticies off the tops of the bump are way off the mark. This is a simply (though very neat) rules work around.

[Dead-Eye]

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

It's a very clever rules workaround. Regulations mandate a 20mm rear wing flap gurney. This gurney must be perpendicular to a line that connects the highest point of the wing at the leading edge to the trailing edge. By locally increasing the height through what are huge bumps, the line goes nose up which in turn backs the gurney out. There's probably some loss from the bumps, but I'm guessing it's more than made up for by the backed out gurney. Here's an image I sketched up:

http://twitpic.com/4ryfzg

All the talk about whales and vorticies off the tops of the bump are way off the mark. This is a simply (though very neat) rules work around.

But wouldn't one bump in the middle be enough for that and cause less loss?

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by Dead-Eye

But wouldn't one bump in the middle be enough for that and cause less loss?

One bump through the entire section would cause a rather large flow separation across the entire length of the top side of the flap (for instance if you extruded the red X-section in my image). You can't just have a singular bump as the regulation speaks specifically to the cross section. Thus with a single bump in the middle the cross section only changes at that point and only at that point could you back the gurney out. Using multiple bumps allows the air through and mitigates the flow separation over the every-other bumps.

[The Badger]

Whose does the aero work for OAK please Mike ? thats clever stuff .

Thanks for the explanation .

[cdsvg]

Interesting little detail on the Oak cars from Spa:



Curved dive plane things attached to the splitter.

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by The Badger

Whose does the aero work for OAK please Mike ? thats clever stuff .

Thanks for the explanation .

I'm told Nicolas Clemencon and Emmanuel Yvon are involved with aero.

[gwyllion]

OAK Racing and its constructor department, Onroak Automotive, present the 2012 OAK-Pescarolo LMP2

Available from the beginning of 2012, the car can house any currently available engine type, with Judd, Nissan, HPD-Honda and soon Ford powerplants all catered for. Tests with the Nissan unit are planned for January, with the Judd having been put through its paces at Sebring in early December. Several teams and drivers have already had the chance to appreciate the car’s performance, particularly Conquest Endurance.

[gwyllion]

http://www.mulsannescorner.com/newsnov11.html points out some of the aero updates.

[The Badger]

God , I hope its not baby blue again !!!

Love to see them return to their daydlo pink/green libery .

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

http://www.mulsannescorner.com/newsnov11.html points out some of the aero updates.

An interesting comment:

Interestingly, Oak's Christophe Chapelain admits the 2012 car essentially isn't any better aerodynamically than the 2011 car, "The gains compared last year is nothing because we have lost too much with the openings."

[lms]

unbelievable. looks like another aco failure. they just cant get it right
all that development....

(its something like the reduced rear wings from 2009-. safer, slower, reduced costs... HAH!)

[gwyllion]

I fail to see which failure you are referring to. The goal of the "big honking fin" and now the "big honking holes" is to improve safety (i.e., reduce the chance of car flipping over), not to reduce costs. Judging from the two Audi crashes in Le Mans this year, the fin does as intended.

[lms]

im not talking about the improved safety, just the "cost-capped" lmp2 formula vs the holes. it seems like oak developed the car and yet they gained no advantage. same as the wings (in 2009): money goes into development to gain back the df they lost with the reduced wing. And despite these they are talking about reducing costs in lmp2

[Fogelhund]

Indeed, rules and rules stability have been an issue with the ACO for a time now. These changes just end up costing money.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by lms

And despite these they are talking about reducing costs in lmp2

In 2012 rules the cost cap for the complete car went up slightly from 345000 to 355000 euro

[gwyllion]

FYI. The brochure of the 2012 Oak-Pescarolo LMP2 includes additional pictures of the computer model and a picture from windtunnel model:
http://www.oak-racing.com/wp-content...tation-Net.pdf

[lms]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

FYI. The brochure of the 2012 Oak-Pescarolo LMP2 includes additional pictures of the computer model and a picture from windtunnel model:
http://www.oak-racing.com/wp-content...tation-Net.pdf

FINALLY bigger headlights

the car looks awesome in front view. I hope many teams will use this chassis next year.Oak Racing, HS Technik, Conquest Racing and maybe United autosport and Black Swan as well.

[Mal]

Originally Posted by lms

im not talking about the improved safety, just the "cost-capped" lmp2 formula vs the holes. it seems like oak developed the car and yet they gained no advantage. same as the wings (in 2009): money goes into development to gain back the df they lost with the reduced wing. And despite these they are talking about reducing costs in lmp2

If Oak want to develop the car and still sell it within the cost capped price range then surely that is their commercial decision?

[The Badger]

Yaknow , OAK havent done a bad job on that fin ..... not a bad lookin car at all . And the holes are fine with me .

[The Real DMN]

Mariantic reports that the cars will be branded as Morgans. Says its in the print edition of Autosport.

Great news if they are, so long as their Green