Quote:
Originally Posted by California98Civic
As I know you know, aerohead, cut-off dates are neither good scholarship or good science. A more nuanced and careful critical reasoning and theorizing is always necessary. And though this is not my field, it seems to me that the two studies I have been sharing here, which seem high grade, do not support a conclusion that the "Tesla wheel" is always good, that a "thick outter radius" is neccesarily superior, or that the smooth cover is necessarily inferior. We are back to the old problem, discussed here often over the 9 years I have been here: each vehicle is a different context and different procedures and testing tools can yield different results. YMMV. Be skeptical of claims. And that skepticism is also where this thread began...
|
Absolutely! Hucho addresses a particular vehicle in a particular wind tunnel.A case-specific scenario.No generalities.
My personal finances preclude the indulgence in $30 SAE Papers,Journals,& Transactions.And I do appreciate Julian's access and willingness to share contemporary research.
General Motors past researches left an indelible impression upon me that, they'd left no stone un-turned,and if they didn't test with rotating wheels,they had a good understanding and defense for that decision.
And while I applaud Tesla,they are not the low-drag leader in automobile manufacture,and in particular reference the the 'aero' wheel research shared online,they took particular liberties with how they presented their data,which would inflate the significance of wheel drag when compared in light of their 'liberties.' No single messenger gets to re-write the rules of engagement,and that include Tesla Motors.