***As long as everyone keeps it respectful/no ad hominems or personal attacks, this discussion can continue. Use the "report post" button (which notifies all moderators, not just me) if you feel someone has violated forum rules: No politics. No religion. No ad hominems. Be civil.***
The proper disclaimer is: Stop trying to use a "template" to predict airflow. It's completely arbitrary and doesn't work. No practicing aerodynamicist recommends it. No textbook author recommends it. Hucho didn't even recommend using one
when I asked him directly about it, let alone the AST specifically out of all the possible templates one could draw.
1) It has never been able to do any of the things claimed of it - ie:
- guide the best shape of tail extensions
- assess the 'aerodynamic purity' of shapes
- show the height that rear spoilers should rise to
- show where there will be separated and attached flows
2) There is no published evidence in any textbook or paper that supports its use or even suggests it is the best of a variety of low drag shapes.
3) There is no published evidence in any textbook or paper that supports it being overlaid on existing shapes of cars to provide a guide to anything.
4) In Julian Edgar's latest book he specifically debunks the claimed uses of the template (i.e. in 1, above) and not one expert aerodynamicist reviewer of the book disagreed with his points.
5) In short, its use in the way it has been promoted on this site is flawed from start to finish.
6) A few minutes of simple testing in the real world will show that the template doesn't do what it's claimed to do.
Forget trying to paste a template on your car. Get out in the real world. Assess:
Then trial modifications and measure the effects of changes:
You should be trying to get a picture of what happens to the immensely complex airflow over your car after making a change to its shape. Use your brain; figure out what sorts of tests will show you what you want to know; make informed decisions based on real results; leave the speculating and guesswork and 2D line drawings behind. Aerodynamics isn’t magic or illusion, it isn’t paint-by-numbers, and it isn’t simple—but it can be illuminated through straightforward and inexpensive testing.