06-06-2013, 09:55 PM
|
#30 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Posts: 4,179
Thanks: 127
Thanked 2,802 Times in 1,968 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERTW
dang you! I came on here to post my pics of my latest CFD testing. I'm trying to replicate the box fish, which MB used to shape the bionic car. My very first iteration, which was 80" long from peak to the kamm back, came to 0.143. My second iteration is 120" long, and came to 0.101. MB said the box fish came to around 0.005 with excellent yaw stability.
I used a convex rectangle section with rounded corners, approximating Morelli's later designs, instead of the "X" type shape of the box fish (I actually took a video of one at the local aquarium today). I was surprised how easily it obtained such a low Cd, considering how much more work I did to get Aero's template to 0.092. The body falls away from the streamlines much quicker, yet there's no delamination.
This answers my question of whether we "need" the tear drop shape for a low Cd. A box is certainly roomier, and easier to fit/hide wheels, and it's much shorter than the template.
Note that any body will work better with a rounded bottom - not flat - and generous fillets on the rocker panels, and a raised tail. Anything to equalise pressure around the perimetre of the body helps prevent vortices. Morelli discusses elliptical shapes to minimise wetted area, hence, skin drag.
discuss amongst yourselves
|
Interesting stuff, I would love to see more of these studies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard
Where I'm at currently is a 6-frequency octahedral symmetry geodesic dome.
|
And now that I know about your dome background, this is all becoming clear.
__________________
George
Architect, Artist and Designer of Objects
2012 Infiniti G37X Coupe
1977 Porsche 911s Targa
1998 Chevy S-10 Pick-Up truck
1989 Scat II HP Hovercraft
You cannot sell aerodynamics in a can............
|
|
|