Quote:
Originally Posted by KamperBob
One size fits all sounds to me like a tall order.
That's where I'm hoping good-enough CFD can help. Even without turbulent boundary perfection my hope is that pressure and flow balance as a function of roof/side taper aggression can be compared. In the case of an aerocap for a pickup, for example, the cab and box fixed geometries no doubt limit how much streamlining can be done.
That was a design goal for me when I drafted a concept cap.
Focusing on your own priorities is completely understandable, Phil. It's too bad the weather was sh*t when I visited last month. For future reference next time I'd be happy to lend a hand wherever I can. Tuck the offer in your back pocket for consideration.  |
Hey Bob! Yeah,with everything that's been published I think I'll just put everything up and let folks digest it on their own.With so many vehicle 'designs',we're not gonna get the 'one-size.'
And yes,let's lean on everything that's available.Especially with respect to universities with CFD that we as individuals can't afford.Last time I went to the IHPV competition at Battle Mountain,the College teams told me that since their school did not have a wind tunnel,they were relying on CFD to predict their bikes performance (by the way,they were all basically Cd 0.11,Varna included according to them).
I'm pretty confident that your cap would be rewarded at the pump.
Over time I think the pickup bed will evolve into something like I showed you on the Dodge.Those square corners are really tough on airflow potential.
I appreciate the help offer.Things happen kind o' spontaneously so it's hard to forecast project time.Hope you found dry desert for riding.And maybe next time things will be drier around here.You're a good trooper! Really enjoyed the visit!