View Single Post
Old 05-24-2020, 04:40 PM   #99 (permalink)
gumby79
Master EcoModder
 
gumby79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Butte, Montana
Posts: 714

little jona - '91 Dodge D 250 first gen cummins LE
Team Streamliner
90 day: 23.4 mpg (US)

Little Jona airo modded - '91 Dodge RAM 3/4 TON D 250 2×4 AUTO
Pickups
Team Cummins
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

The Salted Hound Jenny. - '87 Dodge Ram 50/D-50 5sp 4X4
90 day: 20.24 mpg (US)

Jona Allison aero - '91 Dodge Ram D-250 Le
90 day: 20.84 mpg (US)
Thanks: 206
Thanked 416 Times in 269 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by JulianEdgar View Post
So I tried some rear Edgarwits to see if I could reduce wake size. These were additional to the front ones, and taller. GOE222 true aerofoil profile.



I did some throttle stop testing with the following results (km/h at 30 per cent throttle, low-moderate gusty headwind):
  • No rear Edgarwits: 95
  • 1 finger rear gap: 93
  • 2 finger rear gap: 95
  • 3 finder rear gap (ie about parallel): 96
  • 4 finger rear gap (ie diverging): 96.5

That would make 4 finger vs std about 3 per cent improved in drag.

4 finger gap:



For people interested, but having other cars, don't forget Insight boat-tails a lot with its narrower rear track.

Interesting to see the better performance at the rear with the diverging duct - opposite to what occurred at the front.

I'll do some more testing on a still day, but to me this result is borderline. I'd need to see a big jump in drag reduction on a still day to go in this direction.
Would the rear wing experiment not be just a vertical "blowen diffuser "?

What was the wind direction for the Eroding Clay test? It will help with interpretation of the results.



My interpretation based on what I see, assuming wind from the left ( American driver side)
▪ The airfoil profile has too much curve on the convex side , evidenced by severe separation less than 1/3 Cord at the bottom and 1/4 cord at the top. This would be a good application for test of VG's in a specific use case, (maintenance of attached flow in extreme angle of attack as demonstrated). I have seen a proper demonstration you're witty Edgar's work as intended to a benefit, is there room for improvement, possibly/ possible not.

¿ I'm taking it this was the downwind side?
▪ The up wind /drivers side I expect to see almost,but not quite,a poler opposite. Eg cleaned off by attached flow out side and dirty/covered by sepperated flow on the convex wing surface.

▪ the up wind turning vane / wing is acting like a blown diffuser blowing the wrong direction ,at a yaw angle between 45-180° at typical road going speeds.
E.G. By ~45° yaw (angle of attack~ 90° negative) the wing is past full stall and by ~50°ish yaw it becomes a blowen diffuser.
__________________
1st gen cummins 91.5 dodge d250 ,HX35W/12/6 QSV
ehxsost manafulld wrap, Aero Tonto
best tank: distance 649gps mi 24.04 mpg 27.011usg
Best mpg : 31.32mpg 100mi 3.193 USG 5/2/20


Former
'83 GMC S-15 Jimmy 2door 2wd O/D auto 3.73R&P
'79 Chevy K20 4X4 350ci 400hp msd custom th400 /np205. 7.5-new 14mpg modded befor modding was a thing
87' Hyundai Excel
83 ranger w/87 2.9 L FI2wd auto 18mpg on the floor
04 Mitsubishi Gallant 2.4L auto 26mpg
06 Subaru Forrester XT(WRX PACKAGE) MT AWD Turbocharged 18 plying dirty best of 26mpg@70mph
95Chevy Blazer 4x4 auto 14-18mpg
04 Chevy Blazer 4x4 auto 16-22mpg


  Reply With Quote