Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead
Yes, which brings us back to perspicacity.
Every element of the 'template' is spelled out by Hucho in a constellation of dots.
He provides the premise.
He provides the image.
He provides the empirically-derived quanta.
There is only one which embodies the drag minimum, in the context of an actual vehicle that a driver could see out of.
He explains the application.
We're talking about a 'basic' body, not a 'complex' body.
They're real alright.
And the future, if we want really low drag.
|
You know, each time I keep looking through
Road Vehicle Aerodynamics 2nd edition, or more generally now reading the 5th edition, I keep looking for this stuff about the template -
in the way you describe it and use it. It's simply not there - as others here have also commented.
(
A constellation of dots indeed! What, like it needed to be hidden so only the chosen one would find it?)
Unfortunately, it's a theory that was developed by you, was largely uncritically accepted here, and has then caused all sorts of distorted 'understandings' of car aero to have developed among members of this group. It's clearest when someone pops in after an absence, happily embracing the template - and then suddenly looks around, and realises everyone is staring at them in an odd way. (Well, everyone who has done any investigations of their own, anyway.)
Anyone who uses the template - any of the templates, take your pick - for the following purposes is likely to be on very shaky ground indeed:
- Show where there is separated and attached flow on existing cars
- Guide the shape of rear extensions
- Show how rear spoilers on sedans should be positioned and shaped
- Allow the assessment of the ‘aerodynamic purity’ of cars
Unfortunately all these uses were being made here, if not on a daily basis, then certainly on a weekly basis.