Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroMcAeroFace
Car manufacturers almost always release drag coefficient data rounded to two decimal places, so the 0.31 is actually 0.31 +/- 0.005.
Maximum possible value:
0.315x0.937=0.295155
Minimum possible value:
0.305x0.937=0.285785
The error in the measurements even after the 6.3% drag decrease is thus 0.01, there is no way that 6 decimal places is in any way scientifically appropriate.
It is completely irrelevant whether it is 6%, 6.3% or 6.3000%, the margin of error from the original Cd is way too large to get anything remotely accurate.
I think the people it may offend are scientist and engineers who know the limitations of margin of error.
|
Probably depends upon the type of science one is doing.
When I'm 'noodling', I simply leave whatever is on the display, or move it into memory, for future re-insertion, for the duration of the calculations.
It would be 'more' work, and less time-efficient to do otherwise. Not to mention accuracy issues.
When I began formal studies, rolling force coefficients for tires easily ran to ten decimal places. Observed wind tunnel values, up to 4-places.
If you're looking for that 0.005 difference from a radiator shutter, you want as 'tight' an accounting as possible.
You know that it requires extremely advanced statistical analysis tools to even identify some 'trends' which are under scientific examination?