Quote:
Originally Posted by kach22i
Thank you for giving that scanned book image some context.
The said advantage of cutting airflow to the underside most likely applies to drag alone, and not complete vehicle dynamics of trying to keep a car planted at speed.
Air will get under there no matter what, and you have to manage it.
Air management of the underside beyond that of a smooth belly pan will bear this out with ground effects in mind.
I'm also guessing that reducing the amount of air under the vehicle and as tested did not include increasing the frontal area, otherwise the results would have been tainted and perhaps opposite of desired.
|
*As far as directional stability goes,the concept cars were designed for generic posted speed limits.Electronic governors would prevent someone jockeying for a Darwin-moment from doing themselves in.
*Front airdams are the first thing to deploy with the active suite.
*Then the nose comes down,actually cloaking a bit of front and rear tire.
*Finally,the tail rises a smidgeon to acquire the ideal rake for low drag.
*They're skipping all ground-effects tunnels as they carry an induced-drag penalty.
*Since 1976,lift and stability aren't an issue after the work of Alberto Morelli demonstrated the 'banana' car.