Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Lee
I don't see my improper conclusions.
Downforce is a force. It takes energy to make it. Similar body shape w/o downforce would have less drag.
|
I don't see problems with your statements, just your conclusions as applied to a real world situation, and not some theoretical one.
This real world situation has a call for down-force at high speed for safety, a theoretical situation does not have such a requirement.
So here are your two real life choices.
1. A neutral lift aerodynamic body with sizable wings for down-force.
2. A negative lift aerodynamic body with much smaller wings.
The point is, once you have committed to having some down-force for safety at high speed you need to make a design decision, and not some philosophical statement.
Frank-Lee, if your point is that there would be less drag with no down-force, then yes you win that argument.
You might die in such a vehicle quite easily, and that would make me sad.
The trend to add large wings (Ferrari F-40) then remove as much wing as possible (the Enzo) has been lead by cars with high top speed and high performance.
The Aston Martin AM-RB 001 is simply expressing a trend which was started in racing decades ago, that is to rely on the body, not wings for down-force. Some of this innovation was force by rules limiting wing size, other changes made in the name of efficiency.
If anyone wants to take this into a discussion about lifting bodies, and blended wing aircraft design verses conventional winged aircraft they could. However I say let's stay focused.
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/475200198154450006/
Interesting seating position, but that's no sidecar.
This thread, and post #43 is a good follow up to our discussion:
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/porsc...ea-tray-3.html