Quote:
Originally Posted by kach22i
Xist, thank you for taking the time to compile these collections of posts.
I have to slightly disagree ChazInMT, the template is for an idealized 3D shape, and the way it's often used/abused in the forum is in 2D profile only with little consideration for the resulting vortexes. And when used, it is affecting only the upper aft canopy above the tires or pick-up truck bed.
I've explored this issue from several angles in an attempt to gain a better understanding, going from a 2-part body to a 5-part body. See thread linked to below.
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...tml#post292262
The very idea of adding mass/frontal area to a vehicle such as the type above to meet an idealized template requirement which is not specific to this vehicle's task runs counter to common sense to say the least. And begs the question: then why try it to a common road vehicle?
If there is another way to enclose the wheels of this car without adding mass (area), I'm open to suggestion.
As mentioned in the 2012 Mustang verses the 1978 Escort thread, the frontal area is as important as anything else affecting the drag.
Auto Union Type C Streamline
1:18 Die-cast Model cars and bikes Perth, Western Australia. CMC, Exoto, Carousel 1, Maisto, Hotwheels.
|
May I ask what prompted you to talk about adding frontal area?
---
I made a thread a while back specifically asking about the interaction of templates, from elevation and plan views. Essentially, we learned that one should apply the elevation template as instructed, and use another full teardrop in plan view, scaled to the vehicle's width. Intersect these forms and throw on some radii, mix well and bake at 350 for 20 minutes.
This is the image that went with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kach22i
A cut & paste from the 1936 GM thread:
In short, if you scale down the template, count on making it twice as long.................if it's next to anything else.
|
They way I read that is this: air speeds up when going around an obstacle (the car). When there is another obstacle on top of the main one (a hood bulge on a car, etc), that already accelerated air is made to go even faster to catch up, necessitating a longer teardrop form.
So, are we to believe that if you were to scale down a template to, say, cover an RV's air conditioning box, that you would also have to make the template twice as long as normal compared to its height?