View Single Post
Old 05-28-2011, 01:39 PM   #124 (permalink)
aerohead
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 15,861
Thanks: 23,922
Thanked 7,207 Times in 4,640 Posts
Results: Road Test# 2

Weather forecasters predicted decent weather for May 26,so I took advantage of the weather window in between tornadoes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Viking was road worthy again,although with pre-existing damage from the December 2009 wreck.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test weight was 4,570-LB, within 1% of December,2009.( 1,250 LB over orig. curb weight).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I performed a 20-mile warm-up @ 60 mph ( 2-miles short of SAE recommendation) then headed for LOVE's Travel Stop,elevation 703-feet,PUMP#7 to top-off the tank.
* Weather:CLR, 70 F,RH 55%,Baro. 30.03",wind north @ 7 mph ( headwind)
* I departed northbound,accelerated to 65 mph on I-35 and cruised at a steady 65 mph until road construction forced traffic down to 62-63 mph for about 10-miles.
* I exited at Oswalt Rd,# 21,elevation 1,053', @ 52 miles out,stopped,made the U-turn,and re-accelerated into the construction traffic,southbound,with a 9 mph tailwind,then gaining to 65 mph as we left the construction area.
* At Milam Rd. I made the exit.Stopped.Crossed the bridge to LOVE's,exited into their driveway and drove back to PUMP#7 to top-off.
* At 104 miles for the round trip the T-100 took 3.128 Gallons to fill to top of filler neck,with fuel standing motionless at the top.
*Weather @ end-of-test:CLR, 75 F,48% RH,30.00",wind north @ 9mph.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Mileage works out @ 33.24 mpg @ 62 ave.moving speed ( GARMIN Nuvi 1300),4.321 mpg higher than December,2009.
* Seasonal mileage gain was predicted be 31.497 mpg.
* I believe the 1.743 mpg discrepancy owes to the new nose airdam mod ( which gave me 'boat-tailed' mpg on last September's trip to Bonneville and RENO).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
* @ 33.24 mpg the Cd vs MPG relationship yields a drag coefficient of Cd 0.242.
* However,the extra 1,250 Lb would create an approx. loss of 1.5 mpg owing to the additional R-R.
* Allowing for the added weight,the Drag coefficient would have to be Cd 0.198 to explain the 33.24 mpg at 37.65% overweight.So Cd 0.198 seams reasonable.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Presently,the gap has a wake turbulence volume of 45 cubic-feet( approx. 41% of total wake volume)
* According to Hucho and Chevrolet Truck Division of General Motors Corp.,the 'gap' is responsible for a 19%-20% drag increase.
* Abbott and Von Doenhoff show a mid-chord slotted Clark-Y airfoil at a 23.5% drag penalty.
* The science suggests that the gap-filled trailer will have about Cd 0.159 and 34.56 mpg ( gasoline)
--- 38.36 mpg ( Diesel )
--- 40 mpg ( TDI )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
*If I restore the bellypan diffuser with tire fairings the mpg should go up
* If I repair the broken fairings on Viking the mpg should go up more
* If I complete the leaf-spring fairings the mpg should go higher
* If I fair in the truncation for Bonneville we might see Cd 0.12,as did MG EX -181 and Solaraycer.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I will do a tuft test and photos as the trailer is configured at present for later comparison as mods evolve.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
It appears that the science supports the notion that the gap-filled trailer will ADD mpg when pulled.Viking is over-length and over-weight as a pop-up camping trailer.If reduced to simply a streamlining add-on device at minimum weight,the concept should register a net gain when pulled.We hope to demonstrate this with the Prius project.If I actually make it to the Salt Flats and not blow the engine,the top speed data,plus trip mpg data should be another way to verify the drag coefficient.We'll see.
  Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to aerohead For This Useful Post:
BamZipPow (05-29-2011), euromodder (05-28-2011), KamperBob (05-29-2011), landsailor (06-05-2011)