Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead
*The issue would be a 'one-size-fits-all' booby-trap.
*I can see how the material could function as a turbulator,but each particular vehicle would have to be analyzed for boundary layer thickness at the proposed application sites.
*Vortex-generators might preform better,and there are at least three different kinds of those,and their sizing,spacing,and location are critical to their best success.
*The crenelations and deformations underneath modern cars bellys are a function of laminate sandwiching manufacturing,principally for sound-deadening.They don't require dimples for a turbulent boundary layer if they're going 20-mph or faster.
*The un-dimpled golf balls small size and limited Reynolds number due to the limited 110-mph club velocity pretty much guarantees a laminar boundary layer,high separation,large wake,and high drag,compared to to the dimpled balls turbulent boundary layer,reduced separation,smaller wake,smaller drag.
*We have to bear in mind that a car is so large,that at regular driving speeds,they are already fully immersed in a TBL.
|
THANK YOU!
That first part was my main concern with the material. I would think that the boundary layer would be much thicker on the vehicle, and might require large dimples like those on the drift boat or surf board?
Also, point #2 of yours, the vortex/turbulators I have seen are generally at the point of detachment on the rear window, the ends or edge of the rear of the car. And as you said, require specific placement... That's why I had envisioned the non-uniform surface that carried over from the roof and rear pillars, keeping the flow attached rather than making vortexes to smooth unattached air. Like this... Concept car by French designer Dimitri Bez
Would that make sense? I mean I'm apparently noy the only person to think of this, since he already has a car using this idea lol
~C