Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > Aerodynamics
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 04-17-2008, 01:33 PM   #1 (permalink)
Dartmouth 2010
 
SVOboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hanover, NH
Posts: 6,427

Vegan Powa! - '91 Honda CRX DX
Team Honda
90 day: 66.52 mpg (US)
Thanks: 92
Thanked 114 Times in 82 Posts
Send a message via AIM to SVOboy Send a message via MSN to SVOboy Send a message via Yahoo to SVOboy
Aerodynamic Heavy-Duty Truck Trailer Cuts Fuel Consumption and Emissions By Up to 15%

From GCC:

Quote:
Creating an improved aerodynamic shape for heavy-duty truck trailers by mounting sideskirts can cut fuel consumption and emissions by up to 15%, according to road testing by the Dutch research partnership PART (Platform for Aerodynamic Road Transport). PART is a partnership between TU Delft, TNT, Scania Beers BV, FOCWA Carrosseriebouw, Ephicas, Kees Mulder Carrosserieën, Van Eck Carrosseriebouw, Syntens, Squarell Technology, Emons Group and NEA.

Sideskirts are plates which are mounted on the sides of trailers, primarily with a view to underrun protection. The new aerodynamic design of the sideskirts substantially reduces the air currents alongside and under the trailer and thereby also the air resistance.

Initial driving tests with a trailer equipped with the aerodynamic sideskirts over a straight stretch of public road revealed a cut in fuel consumption of between 5% and 15%. Subsequent research comprising long-term operational tests by TNT displayed a fuel reduction of 10%.

These results confirm calculations and findings from the wind tunnel tests that had established that the observed 14 - 18% reduction in air resistance led to 7 - 9% less fuel consumption. In practice, the figures are in fact even better.

PART expects that the cost of fitting aerodynamically-shaped sideskirts will be recouped within two years. Furthermore, the sideskirts can be fitted to approximately half the trucks currently in use in the Netherlands as the skirts can also be retrofitted.

In 2005, 10,000 new trailers were taken into use in the Netherlands. With an average fuel consumption of 30 liters per 100 kilometers [7.8 mpg US], that translates into 750 million liters of diesel consumption in the Netherlands each year. We can cut fuel consumption by 5% or more for 50% of those trailers. That means a reduction of 50 million tons of CO2 emissions a year. This research can therefore result in a substantial, structural contribution to cutting fuel consumption and an annual saving of tens of millions of Euros, next to that cut in CO2 emissions by the road transport sector.

Together with this sector we have created a practical platform for further research and development, but we still need active government participation. Just obtaining permits for all the road tests has involved a huge amount of time, energy and frustration. The next step is realizing a practical partnership between the government and industry in order to put the solutions into practice.
—Prof. Michel van Tooren of TU Delft’s Aerospace Engineering faculty

Road tests have also already been initiated on boat tails. These constructions on the rear of a trailer ensure a reduction in the wake—the vacuum and air currents which arise when the trailer is moving. In theory, a boat tail could also mean a cut in air resistance of 30%, with a fuel reduction of 10 - 15%. These road tests should also confirm the earlier, highly positive results from the windtunnel.

Boat tails, however, are limited in practical use, in particular when loading and unloading—safety aspects and problems with exceeding maximum vehicle sizes prevent these being used for many types of vehicles.

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 04-17-2008, 03:07 PM   #2 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 10,907
Thanks: 17,255
Thanked 5,830 Times in 3,519 Posts
skirts/boattails

Yep,it all works! And luckily for America, the DOT allows the boattails to be run on roads without special permits.I see trailer side skirts,they look like ABS,some are already fracturing,don't know the cause.With Diesel now at over $4.00/gallon,we may see more air cheaters on the road.
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2008, 03:38 PM   #3 (permalink)
MechE
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 1,151

The Miata - '01 Mazda MX-5 Miata
Thanks: 0
Thanked 20 Times in 17 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead View Post
.I see trailer side skirts,they look like ABS,some are already fracturing,don't know the cause.
ABS is pretty bad when it comes to UV exposure... Unless stabilizers are added... then, how good are the stabilizers used?

UV exposure makes it more brittle (I know a member here has a citicar - ask him about that ). Given the vibration/forces a trailer side skirt would see - it's likely to fracture if it becomes too brittle.

Honestly, sheet metal with folded edges (for a bit more stiffness) would be very appropriate here. Sure, it will weigh more, but longevity is key for an application like this. And besides, it doesn't have to be plate steel

From GCC comments
http://www.freightwing.com


^Look how this one tapers inwards too...



__________________
Cars have not created a new problem. They merely made more urgent the necessity to solve existing ones.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2008, 11:46 PM   #4 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Brunswick, Ohio
Posts: 121

Danger Ranger - '01 Ford Ranger Edge 4x4
90 day: 14.52 mpg (US)

Moms car - '05 Ford Freestyle Limited
90 day: 21.92 mpg (US)

Mistress - '10 Harley-Davidson 883 Sportster 883 Iron
90 day: 42.53 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Send a message via AIM to meemooer
i saw an experimental one today!! i tried to take a pick, but it was too blurry on my phone. It was gray plastic, in 3 pieces on each side, and they had test piece #4 in the middle of each panel.
Hopefully someone will start mass producing these for cheap, so trucking companies will be more will to buy them
__________________
Randy
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2008, 12:01 AM   #5 (permalink)
Depends on the Day
 
RH77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kansas City Area
Posts: 1,761

Teggy - '98 Acura Integra LS
Sports Cars
90 day: 32.74 mpg (US)

IMA - '10 Honda Insight EX
Team Honda
90 day: 34.76 mpg (US)

Tessie - '06 Acura TSX Base
90 day: 28.2 mpg (US)
Thanks: 31
Thanked 41 Times in 35 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by meemooer View Post
i saw an experimental one today!! i tried to take a pick, but it was too blurry on my phone. It was gray plastic, in 3 pieces on each side, and they had test piece #4 in the middle of each panel.
Hopefully someone will start mass producing these for cheap, so trucking companies will be more will to buy them
It makes so much sense, I don't know why it isn't more common!

Theory: Trailers are often not owned by the Owner/Operator, so the trailer owner has no interest in spending money to save the provider.

As for the big trucking companies -- is it too late? Right now money's tight with the fuel price, so how much extra cash is there to retrofit trailers?

It can only save in the "long-run"...

RH77
__________________
“If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research” ― Albert Einstein

_
_
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2008, 09:31 AM   #6 (permalink)
A madman
 
brucey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: WV
Posts: 1,012

Pequod - '17 Subaru Outback
90 day: 22.79 mpg (US)
Thanks: 70
Thanked 179 Times in 96 Posts
Send a message via AIM to brucey
Most businesses look at payback time on stuff like this. It didn't take very long for restaraunts to switch to CFL (for the most part) because they have 1,000 lights in their establishments. If its got a pretty quick payback time, then I see them investing in it a lot easier than if its got a 10 year payback.

And jeez, 10-15% From side skirts? Imagine an actual aerodynamic design, not a band aid.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2008, 09:40 AM   #7 (permalink)
Master Novice
 
elhigh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SE USA - East Tennessee
Posts: 2,285

Josie - '87 Toyota Pickup
90 day: 28.83 mpg (US)

Felicia - '09 Toyota Prius Base
90 day: 48.42 mpg (US)
Thanks: 403
Thanked 592 Times in 434 Posts
Considering how many dozens of thousands miles big rigs run each year, 10% on a heavy truck means way more than 20% on my little commutatruck. Imagine if we could consistently get 10 or more mpg out of a long-hauler. Trucking companies would be knocking each other down to rebuild their fleets with that model.
__________________




Lead or follow. Either is fine.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2008, 04:00 PM   #8 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 560
Thanks: 1
Thanked 67 Times in 53 Posts
It would not cost very much to make light and removable plastic panels usable on most or all trailers. With these, they could fair the airflow around the leading edges, sides, bottom, rear, etc., and remove for use on other trailers at the end of the trip.

For that matter, the tractors virtually all have aero designs that really suck.

What were those people thinking?
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2008, 06:23 PM   #9 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Big Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Steppes of Central Indiana
Posts: 1,313

The Red Baron - '00 Ford F-350 XLT
90 day: 27.99 mpg (US)

Impala Phase Zero - '96 Chevrolet Impala SS
90 day: 21.03 mpg (US)
Thanks: 0
Thanked 182 Times in 123 Posts
I do agree that Class 8 trucks offer a lot of scope for fuel consumption reduction.

That said, the sheer flexibility of the “tractor-trailer arrangement” defeats any “silver bullet” anyone can come up with. There are trailers of every description and are used in a lot of different ways. Some lend themselves to improvements in FE, some are Mission: Impossible.

Take the most common trailer – the box van. Actually it has two versions. One is the purpose-built box van and the other is a type of flatbed that is specialized for standardized shipping containers. A trucker may simply drive to a destination, unhitch his trailer and pickup another (very common) or he may wait at the dock for his trailer to be unloaded and maybe reloaded for another run. Where the shipper owns the trailer (FedEx, Wal-Mart) and can control the usage of the trailer, you will see aero trailers. FedEx doubles in particular are rapidly going to aero features. But when you drop a trailer and grab another, the trailer owner has zero incentive fort any frills, because he doesn’t think he pays for the fuel.

On the other hand, a bulk trailer (dry stuff like flour or plastic pellets) might spend its entire service life hooked to the same tractor. But somewhere along the line somebody decided that the additional weight of fairing in a mobile adventure in piping imposed more of a weight penalty than the aero gain. The same is pretty much true of tank trucks. Old goats like me remember when truck trucks were nicely faired, but nobody has made a tank trailer like that since the 50s. Too expensive, too heavy, and the fairings tend to hide leaks.

Flats and auto delivery trailers (“rolling parking lots”) are probably beyond hope.

A subset of trucks that has a lot of scope for aero work is “expediters.” These are long-range (they have sleepers, road gearing and drive trains) straight trucks usually Class 5 or 6 but sometimes Class 7. These trucks generally haul light, time sensitive loads over medium distances – say Pittsburgh to Indianapolis. Time sensitivity means they have to run as fast as they can get away with and that opens the door for aero mods. The truck is all solidly attached so they tend to be owned by owner-operators and they are touchy about fuel.

Trucks severely need to get into CCTV rearview systems. Class 8 trucks are often festooned with three or four sets of side-view mirrors.
__________________
2000 Ford F-350 SC 4x2 6 Speed Manual
4" Slam
3.08:1 gears and Gear Vendor Overdrive
Rubber Conveyor Belt Air Dam
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2010, 10:19 PM   #10 (permalink)
CGBJake
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Waterford
Posts: 15
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Cool

Like this!

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fuel Economy related papers tasdrouille General Efficiency Discussion 38 09-10-2017 12:48 AM



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com