Fuel Economy, Hypermiling, EcoModding News and Forum - EcoModder.com - View Single Post - Aerodynamic Streamlining Template: Part-C

aardvarcus · 06-03-2013, 08:21 AM

I don’t understand what all the conundrum is about.

A person who is knowledgeable in the fields of aerodynamics created a useful tool based on generally accepted aerodynamic theory. (It’s just a half cross-section of an established shape.) That person then distributed that tool free of charge. It’s so easy anyone who can overlay a picture can get an idea of a good place to start. Yes the tool takes some adapting to get it to fit a typical vehicle, but it seems that most people who have created boat tails have figured this detail out, and it seems to work for them.

Is it the absolutely perfectly most aggressive but still yet optimal cross section to apply in top view and side view? I don’t know. I am sure someone who owns a wind tunnel and does extensive vehicle testing could develop a shape that would be more ideal for any given vehicle, but those people aren’t exactly on the internet giving out advice for free. Frankly I am appreciative that someone though enough of “the rest of us” to spend their time creating this reference, updating it, and answering questions about it.

I am also appreciative that there are those on here who question the established theories. I personally would love to see some of these different ideas designed, built, tested, and posted so that I can see your results.

It is pretty easy to see that the conversation here is no longer providing useful dialogue; it has disintegrated into an internet shouting match. I at one time provided free advice on double stud walls and a few other classically-based building systems on a few internet forums related to low energy housing. The help I provided very similar to the template; it was basic ideas on how to build something very close to standard but would perform very well. I am sure it wasn’t “perfectly optimal” but it was based on sound building theory, it was affordable, and I had some experience having actually built one house that performed excellently and started on my second. There were some other theories on those forums, SIP, ICF, Straw, OVE Stack with spray foam, etcetera. My double stud related posts were constantly criticized, mostly by people who had never built a low energy house, but were planning great things. Over time I decided to stop helping.

I hope those on this forum who have done don’t decide to stop helping. [/rant]

06-03-2013, 08:21 AM	#571 (permalink)
aardvarcus Master EcoModder Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Evensville, TN Posts: 676 Deep Blue - '94 GMC Suburban K2500 SLE 90 day: 23.75 mpg (US) Griffin (T4R) - '99 Toyota 4Runner SR5 90 day: 25.43 mpg (US) Thanks: 237 Thanked 580 Times in 322 Posts	I don’t understand what all the conundrum is about. A person who is knowledgeable in the fields of aerodynamics created a useful tool based on generally accepted aerodynamic theory. (It’s just a half cross-section of an established shape.) That person then distributed that tool free of charge. It’s so easy anyone who can overlay a picture can get an idea of a good place to start. Yes the tool takes some adapting to get it to fit a typical vehicle, but it seems that most people who have created boat tails have figured this detail out, and it seems to work for them. Is it the absolutely perfectly most aggressive but still yet optimal cross section to apply in top view and side view? I don’t know. I am sure someone who owns a wind tunnel and does extensive vehicle testing could develop a shape that would be more ideal for any given vehicle, but those people aren’t exactly on the internet giving out advice for free. Frankly I am appreciative that someone though enough of “the rest of us” to spend their time creating this reference, updating it, and answering questions about it. I am also appreciative that there are those on here who question the established theories. I personally would love to see some of these different ideas designed, built, tested, and posted so that I can see your results. It is pretty easy to see that the conversation here is no longer providing useful dialogue; it has disintegrated into an internet shouting match. I at one time provided free advice on double stud walls and a few other classically-based building systems on a few internet forums related to low energy housing. The help I provided very similar to the template; it was basic ideas on how to build something very close to standard but would perform very well. I am sure it wasn’t “perfectly optimal” but it was based on sound building theory, it was affordable, and I had some experience having actually built one house that performed excellently and started on my second. There were some other theories on those forums, SIP, ICF, Straw, OVE Stack with spray foam, etcetera. My double stud related posts were constantly criticized, mostly by people who had never built a low energy house, but were planning great things. Over time I decided to stop helping. I hope those on this forum who have done don’t decide to stop helping. [/rant]