Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard
Questions: - Is the order important, i. e. attached flow and wetted areas more significant than frontal area and interference drag?
- With an open wheel vehicle (my favorite use case) is the interference drag between the wheel/tire and the body or is it between the axle/suspension/steering linkage and those?
How well would a Dymaxion [Omni-directional Transport] with a boxed cavity truncation fare against these guidelines? |
1) Your 1st question isn't specific enough. We need some caveats, conditions of the vehicle specification in order to work with it.
2) The 1976 CNR project provides insight into the DYMAXION Car question.
* The Morelli body of the 'Banana' car was Cd 0.161.
* When wheels were added, the Cd jumped to Cd 0.35.
* When the wheels were 'integrated' ( Hucho's terminology ) better into the bodywork, the drag fell to Cd 0.201.
* Hucho has also written on the remarkable drag contribution of the open wheels of the Rumpler Limousine, measured at Volkswagen.
* The 1987 GM Sunraycer was reported to have a difference of Cd 0.089, and Cd 0.12 when the full wheel-fairing package was removed for the World Solar Challenge.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As to the DYMAXION Car box cavity. Again, we'd need to know how much truncation would be performed, and then the type, and length of the box-cavity.
* Hucho depicts one type of architecture.
* United States Patent # 4,682,808, Filed July 24, 1985, by Alan J. Bilanin depicts a proper cavity. His twenty-one references date to as early as 1933.