Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > Aerodynamics
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 08-13-2010, 06:35 PM   #41 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 16,279
Thanks: 24,401
Thanked 7,367 Times in 4,766 Posts
speeds

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmac257 View Post
I am just trying to learn not criticize one way or another but I get no sense of speed from this picture. It is my understanding from reading in this forum that speed matters. This picture stops action so well there is almost no bluring of the background or the wheels.

My understanding is that at slow speeds there is less compression of the air in front, air moving around the vehicle will be moving slower, the air will remain attached easier, the air will be able to close behind the vehicle easier .. so less resistance and less drag.

Higher speed would mean higher compression of air in front, faster air flow around the vehicle, and air will be unable to combine behind the vehicle fast enough so detaches with drag behind car.

And my question is this: Is the ideal aero template different for different speeds? If so how do you determine the ideal template for a vehicle that will NEVER see 65mph but will normally be driven at 45mph tops?

Don
For the size and length of road vehicles,the drag coefficient is constant above 20-mph.
As to compressibility,air is considered an incompressible fluid below about 250-mph,as a vehicle would be entering transonic flow in ground-effect.
At really 'slow' speeds flow would actually be less stable and drag actually be higher on a velocity basis do to the weak laminar boundary layer.
As velocity increases to 20-mph,there is a transition to a turbulent boundary layer where momentum of the outer strata of air can be communicated into the boundary layer adjacent the body by violent mixing,increasing the energy near the boundary and allowing it to batter withstand the adverse pressure gradient which occurs downstream of the point of maximum velocity,effectively moving the separation point further back,reducing the wake,and drag.
The 'Template' would be good for anything over 20-mph,up to around 250-mph.
The 'template',at 80% length ( about all we can use due to ground clearance ) would produce a car of Cd 0.13.If you streamlined the wheels and tires like solar racers you could go towards Cd 0.10.
Of course,practicality must be weighed out.Personally,I would only consider the whole length in the context of a trailer with sealed gap.

  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to aerohead For This Useful Post:
Cd (12-18-2010)
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 12-18-2010, 02:09 AM   #42 (permalink)
Easter McoModder
 
SwamiSalami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: West Texas, US
Posts: 363

'99 Subaru OLL 2.5L - '99 Subaru Outback Legacy Limited
90 day: 22.57 mpg (US)

Rabbit - '08 VW Rabbit S
90 day: 32.93 mpg (US)
Thanks: 212
Thanked 28 Times in 26 Posts
That was intense. Awesome.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2010, 08:29 AM   #43 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
JasonG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Charlotte NC / York SC
Posts: 728

05 DMax - '05 Chevrolet 2500HD
90 day: 18.48 mpg (US)
Thanks: 120
Thanked 56 Times in 52 Posts
If you go back to the Flowillustrator video you will notice the green transition layer thickens noticible as it goes down the rear of the Beetle.
This may not be full seperation, but is causing significant drag.
A full seperation from a trip edge (ie "Herod's Helper") will cause less drag even though there is more turbulance.
Turbulent seperation provides force at a small magnitude in many directions while a thickened transition layer provides a larger force over an increased area, half of the rear of the car.
__________________



I can't understand why my MPG's are so low..........
21,000lb, 41' Toy Haulers are rough on FE!
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2010, 06:18 PM   #44 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
Herod's Helper isn't a trip edge; it's a spoiler.

__________________


  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Some Thoughts on Aerodynamic Shapes 3-Wheeler Aerodynamics 68 04-14-2012 03:16 PM
Aerodynamic Heavy-Duty Truck Trailer Cuts Fuel Consumption and Emissions By Up to 15% SVOboy Aerodynamics 11 12-27-2011 08:18 AM
1951 Diesel Beetle ~~~ 40MPG Laurentiu The Lounge 3 07-23-2010 05:43 PM
Sources of Aerodynamic Drag in Automobiles and Possible Solutions SVOboy Aerodynamics 12 02-17-2010 03:09 PM
Modern Rolls Royce Phantom vs Aerodynamic Coupe Unheard Aerodynamics 2 06-19-2009 11:19 PM



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com