Quote:
Originally Posted by fbov
Keep throwing the caution flags, but throw them at the right thing.
An Indian grad student's paper showing empirical verification of theoretical modeling only proves that CFD makes testable predictions with a degree of accuracy. This isn't a VG paper, they just use them as a matter of convenience, as their properties are well known. Standard academic procedure.
The Mitsubishi paper is interesting, as it's clearly aimed at performance improvements. Those familiar with car aerodynamics (or at least with Hucho) know this test is rigged. The Lancer rear window is too steep to maintain attached flow past the roof. 14 degrees is the transition, IIRC. Mitsu's doing good engineering here.
VG's work wonders in certain applications, as on airplane wings. Not so much elsewhere; throw the flag at the offender, not the tool.
Frank
|
*I'm to throw the flag at the right thing.
*I criticized the methodology and results.If this data passes without rebuttal,then there's a danger of it passing as knowledge.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
*I see zero empirical validation of theoretical modelling,nor proof of anything.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*The entire paper is predicated upon vortex generators as is clearly stated in the title header.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*VG properties are clearly known to who?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Why is the test rigged? Gary Wheeler's VGs are clearly targeted to notchback cars which all suffer separation-induced drag penalties.Wheeler's VGs are well known in the aerodynamic/aeronautical community.Mitsubishi would be no exception,when embarking on their investigation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*"VGs work wonders" .You are a devotee of VGs? Am I slamming VGs?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Are VGs the 'offender' ? I should criticize VGs and leave the students alone?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Or do I leave VGs alone and comment on a paper which has no scientific merit and perhaps should have stayed within the confines of the university,if they were actually attempting to push the state-of-the-art?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------