View Single Post
Old 05-02-2020, 01:56 AM   #11 (permalink)
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,060
Thanks: 107
Thanked 1,594 Times in 1,131 Posts
Originally Posted by California98Civic View Post

My coast down method was different than the one you describe. Rather than measuring time between two speeds, I coasted from X speed to a full stop, measuring distance with GPS. But I think I need better GPS. Mine was reporting accuracy of only to within 20 to 50 feet. I was coasting 2600 to 3500 feet to stop, so that's roughly 0.75 to 1.9 % inaccuracy in my calcs from just the GPS. Not awful but not great. What GPS are you using to confirm speed?

Coastdowns should never be done coming to a standstill, in my opinion. Why? Because you are then spending too long at speeds where aero drag is basically not relevant - but it potentially adds to the error.

But I have never had any luck with coast-downs - of any sort. And Rob Palin (ex Tesla aerodynamicist) was scathing about them in a recent email to me.

The GPS I am using to show speed is my car's speedo - MoTeC 10Hz GPS.

On your tests and their results. I'd just call all those designs 'separation edges'. (I think 'box cavities' is another thing - like 'The Template' - that gets a lot of coverage here but doesn't have much evidence for it.)

Top and side separation edges will add a small drag benefit (assuming attached flow to the back of the car) but I very much doubt it's measurable by either a coastdown or my throttle-stop technique. If you wished to, you could directly measure the pressures in the base area of the car (ie the part exposed to the wake) but I doubt there'd be any measurable change, except perhaps in a reduction in suction peaks where the separation edges themselves are changing the flow pattern ie less wraparound.

The dust patterns on the top of the bumper cover are interesting but I cannot draw any conclusions from them.

  Reply With Quote