Quote:
Originally Posted by pnambic
I've been wondering the same thing.
My (rudimentary) understanding is that the airdam helps by directing the air away from the underside of the vehicle where there's lots of junk to cause drag. The airdam would increase the frontal area (I'm sorry if I'm misusing the term - please correct me if I'm wrong) but the cost here is supposed to be more than made up by the reduction in drag from under the vehicle. But if you do a proper belly pan, will the airdam still be a worthwhile investment or will the increased drag of the airdam negate or maybe even exceed its positive impact?
It would seem to me that the use of both a belly pan and an airdam might well produce low pressure area under the vehicle that would increase downforce (and probably improve handling) but might also increase drag?
|
with two of my vehicles I saw an improvement when the airdam was lowered in front of a full bellypan.
I've never gone lower than the bottom of the lowest suspension member,but it is lower than what the SAE recommends for clearance for driveway ramps,etc..
And clearance is limited such that I must be very diligent when approaching curbs,even with a flexible lip down there,or it's 'whammo'!
Ford chose an active front airdam for its PROBE-IV concept car which had a really nice bellypan.That car also had active suspension which would alter ground clearance ,plus angle-of-attack as a function of driving speed.
Volvo has also produced a speed-sensitive active front dam.
Many current supercars employ active suspension and active rear spoilers for high speed stability and safety,but not so much in the way of active front dams.
You are correct,that when lowering the dam you'll finally reach a point where the frontal area will begin to be aggravated.And at some point,the drag reduction will overshadow the increase in CdA.Then drag will rise again,canceling the gain.
Only testing will determine the cross-over point.
