|
Bicycle Bob,
Yup, though even Morelli did not squeeze the boundary layer. His analysis assumed laminar flow, and dealt only with that part of the problem.
There are two problems with the Morelli shape (1) the camber requirement forces the underside to rise so as to cut into room behind where the front seat would be, and (2) (not discussed here yet) is that there is a well expressed desire of people to not ride puny, meaning riding so low that vision is blocked and the sense of being immently crushed becomes a nerve racking problem.
I realized some time ago that the popularity of pick-ups and raised vehicles had some rational basis, which is that it really is quite pleasant to ride with a high visual perspective. I even surmise that no car will really be successful in the market that is low slung; I came to this conclusion and it was supported by a study of the 100 year history of the automobile. There have been quite a few that actually were very efficient, these include Isetta, Messerschmitt, and all the way back to the 'Cycle cars' of the 1910-1920 era. All were quickly done in by big and relatively high cars.
And we should not get confused by the roadsters and their great appeal for driving on scenic mountain roads, as with Grace Kelly driving and so on. On freeways, the sports car definitely gives a different set of sensations, as you ride along looking into truck wheel wells from below.
|