AirFlow BulletTruck Project (aerodynamic, modified Class 8 transport doubles MPG)

[arcosine]

Are trailer sizes standardized? Would a flexible filler on the tractor work so it wouldn't have to be adjusted for different trailers? Have you experienced more wind buffeting with the improved aerodynamics?

[Flakbadger]

Originally Posted by arcosine

Would a flexible filler on the tractor work so it wouldn't have to be adjusted for different trailers?

I believe that is something in development on the next truck... I remember hearing somewhere that close to 25% of drag on a semi comes from the gap between the cab and trailer.

[slowmover]

An old Marmon really is the definition of "large car".

[user removed]

The instant you post anything on the internet, if you do not already have a provisional application filed with the Patent Office, your innovation is in the public domain and not patentable.
Even then your patent application is subject to any "prior art" that preceeded your application, any time, anywhere.
Another threshold is the "obvious to someone educated in the art" rejection provision that is very difficult to overcome when the examiner takes the position that it was "obvious".
You are required by law to submit any prior art you discover to the Patent Office, even though it may actually cause your application to be rejected. It does not matter if the design is hundreds of years old or from any other country on the Planet. If it is prior art that reqpresents the "novelty" of you innovation, you will probably never see a Patent issued.
While you may feel that you have true innovation in your design, the burden of proof is practically insurmountable, and even after you get a Patent, it is subject to legal review and subsequent rejection, even after approval.
regards
Mech

[gone7]

The best way today would be to just be the first to market. One simply creates, sells and then gets out of the business when something better comes along. (Unless the better idea came from the same business.)

[lowglider]

If you do have a working prototype and a patent but lack funding, why not try to go directly to a smart truck making company and talk to them?
This way you get a lot of money from licensing fees and your product has a much better and quicker chance to go to mass market because they have already broken the ice and know the ins and outs of the business. Of course don`t forget to have a good lawyer.

I know we can get possessive on our brainchilds, but why go fight against the big guys when you can be friends with them.

And btw Shepherd777, thank you for your contribution to mankind. It`s been hurting me since I`ve learnt the basics of physics to go so many places around the world and everywhere see these truck monsters trying to fight air in such a primitive way.
And now your work has upped the game considerably.

[Shepherd777]

Hello All -

I have not been spending much time at this forum, even thought I really, really enjoy it, and all of the clever ideas, experimentation, and DIY projects.

I am not overly interested in reviving this dead-horse of a thread, but I felt that I must address a recurring falsity that I have seen on the internet. And I feel this forum has very broad depth of intelligent viewership to make this following point. I have seen everyone from a spokesman of one of the big truck OEM's, to fellow Ecomodder members opine on this subject.

That subject being that we extended the length of the BulletTruck in some sort of fool-hearty and misguided effort solely to help with the aerodynamics. Nothing could be further from the truth.

We always knew that we wanted to do this retrofit prototype by lowering the cooling system package from its stock location. This was accomplished to somewhat negate the horizontal phone booth hood look and aerodynamics that a lot of Class 8 trucks still have. And this way, we could provide a beautiful curved aerodynamic slope to the top of the hood. Please scroll up to the top of this Ecomodder forum page and check out the red conventional rig and its hood if a refresher is necessary.

The stock OEM location for the cooling system package (radiator, shroud, charge-air- cooler, A/C condenser) is mounted on top of the most-forward front crossmember. So to lower the cooling system we had to hand-build custom rubber-mounted cooling system brackets in front of the frame and that crossmember. This is the only way we could substantially lower the cooling system package for the hood slope we were looking for.

Additionally, we had to position the rear of the radiator forward enough of that crossmember so that the hot air expelling from the rear of the radiator would not slam directly into that crossmember, and block the air flow.

We also had to add a FMCSA (Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration) mandated, and subsequently approved, horizontal 4" square steel tube bumper in front of that new cooling package. The bumper wraps around the cooling system package and ties directly into the truck frame for structural integrity. All of these component requirements necessitated that the front of the body be extended to envelope the components. It also created a lot of body overhang, forward of the front axle. This was not really an operational issue as we have shown that the overhang is equal to some very expensive motor-homes.

So in a nutshell, we extended the front of the BulletTruck not for aerodynamics, but for component packaging.

Compromises always have to be made when doing any retrofitting.

Our next-generation Class 8 rig (assuming we ever get the funding) will not have this extended and pointy look in the front end, or the body overhang.

Just wanted to clear that up. Thanks.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Shepherd777

Hello All -

I have not been spending much time at this forum, even thought I really, really enjoy it, and all of the clever ideas, experimentation, and DIY projects.

I am not overly interested in reviving this dead-horse of a thread, but I felt that I must address a recurring falsity that I have seen on the internet. And I feel this forum has very broad depth of intelligent viewership to make this following point. I have seen everyone from a spokesman of one of the big truck OEM's, to fellow Ecomodder members opine on this subject.

That subject being that we extended the length of the BulletTruck in some sort of fool-hearty and misguided effort solely to help with the aerodynamics. Nothing could be further from the truth.

We always knew that we wanted to do this retrofit prototype by lowering the cooling system package from its stock location. This was accomplished to somewhat negate the horizontal phone booth hood look and aerodynamics that a lot of Class 8 trucks still have. And this way, we could provide a beautiful curved aerodynamic slope to the top of the hood. Please scroll up to the top of this Ecomodder forum page and check out the red conventional rig and its hood if a refresher is necessary.

The stock OEM location for the cooling system package (radiator, shroud, charge-air- cooler, A/C condenser) is mounted on top of the most-forward front crossmember. So to lower the cooling system we had to hand-build custom rubber-mounted cooling system brackets in front of the frame and that crossmember. This is the only way we could substantially lower the cooling system package for the hood slope we were looking for.

Additionally, we had to position the rear of the radiator forward enough of that crossmember so that the hot air expelling from the rear of the radiator would not slam directly into that crossmember, and block the air flow.

We also had to add a FMCSA (Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration) mandated, and subsequently approved, horizontal 4" square steel tube bumper in front of that new cooling package. The bumper wraps around the cooling system package and ties directly into the truck frame for structural integrity. All of these component requirements necessitated that the front of the body be extended to envelope the components. It also created a lot of body overhang, forward of the front axle. This was not really an operational issue as we have shown that the overhang is equal to some very expensive motor-homes.

So in a nutshell, we extended the front of the BulletTruck not for aerodynamics, but for component packaging.

Compromises always have to be made when doing any retrofitting.

Our next-generation Class 8 rig (assuming we ever get the funding) will not have this extended and pointy look in the front end, or the body overhang.

Just wanted to clear that up. Thanks.

After gleaning "Aerodynamiks des Kraftfahrzeugs",by Baron Reinhard von Fachsenfeld,I'm less dismissive of the 'Pointy' nose.
In his drag tables he illustrates a 'Reverse-Template',streamline body of revolution of 6.5:1 fineness ratio,running tail-first into the wind.The tests would have been performed at the FKFS wind tunnel under the supervision of Dr.Wunibald I.Kamm,whom ran the organization.
The Cd wasn't as low as the 'nose-first' body,but it was within about 15% if memory serves me.
Outward vision would be an obvious issue (internal reflections on inner face of windshield),but for a DOT-approved 48-inch rigid boat tail rig,or 60-inch inflatable boat tail rig,this nose configuration could have merit.
Without the 70% 'Template' boat tail,the 'pointy ' rig might achieve on the order of sub-Cd 0.16.Not shabby for an 18-wheeler.
Oskar G.Tietgens,of Westinghouse Laboratories had demonstrated a self-propelled railroad car of Cd 0.08 in the early 1930s.The car had a 'pointy' nose,and abbreviated boat tail.
Bob,thanks for all you and your team has done,and for sharing all the gory details.Hope you find $$$ for the next-gen rig project.'will be watching.

[ECONORAM]

Originally Posted by Shepherd777

Cummins finally shipped me the new pre-programmed ECM, and I installed it last week. It works great.

We loaded in Connecticut last Wednesday night, delivered in Tracy, California yesterday, and Hillsboro, Oregon this morning.

We hit 35mph 3/4 headwinds all the way through Wyoming, and 40mph crosswinds through Utah. And then there was that rocky-mountain-thingy part. So the mpg went down a little.

But we still went coast to coast at 13.4 mpg.

We had a load of Stanley automatic aluminum doors, like the type that one walks through at the front of a Home Depot. So this was a light load at 10,000 lbs.

Here are a couple of pics. The first one here is just like it says. From Gary, Indiana to Cheyenne, Wyoming. As you can see from the center top box, we are moving at 55mph.

I usually know how to spell Cheyenne when I'm not that sleepy.



Upper left corner is time. 3:04 in the afternoon.

We are doing 14.2 instant mpg at 17% engine load which means we are climbing. Level straight no-grade we would be doing 10% engine load and 17.5-18mpg.

The three numbers on the lower right mean 950.5 miles since I re-set the readout in Gary, Indiana. We used 67.4 gallons of fuel. Which came out to 14.1 mpg. We also averaged 14.1 from Connecticut to Gary.

Here is right after we got unloaded in Tracy, CA. I took this pic while still backed into the loading dock. As you can see, we went 3043.0 miles coast to coast. The lower right
2117.9 miles is the distance to where I re-set the display in Gary, IN. So for that 2117.9 miles we used 157.8 gallons of diesel fuel for 13.4 mpg.



Sorry for the poor quality of this pic. I have no idea what the white spots on the bottom of the display panel are. Dust reflections??

National average for Class 8 trucks is currently 6.5 mpg.

skyking - We're down at Jubitz in Portland, but I'm not sure which way we are going from here. If we do head up to Seattle, I'll let you know beforehand, if I have the time.

Nuts. And I thought I was doing good by finally making 500 miles on one tank! Good work Shepherd!! The tractor looks great. To be honest, I was expecting the rig to get at least 13mpg; quite impressive to achieve double the typical fuel mileage!
Maybe on the next model, an adjustable nose piece to raise and lower might be beneficial? Or maybe some height adjustable fairings like my truck has in front of the front tires...

Originally Posted by HydroJim

sheperd777- That's how I feel. I'm only 16, but besides playing professional baseball, my life's dream would be to open up a manufacturing plant that makes affordable efficient cars. Unfortunately, I don't have millions of dollars sitting around to do that so I have to hope for an investor. It would be really cool if you could get these into production. Not only is there a direct affect of saving gas, but this could completely change the economy by dropping the price of anything that is shipped. Plus, it would help the environment too

Keep up the good work

HydroJim; do not let people tell you that you cannot do it. I've encountered all kinds of nay-sayers with projects I've done in the past, as well as the ECONORAM project truck. I've been working on it for 6 years now. It now gets 25% above EPA, and I'm not done yet. Keep good notes on your ideas, seek others that have similar interests (such as the ecomodder crowd), and keep positive (Bible verses help me with that). You may not achieve exactly what you are after, but when you keep after it you will achieve something worthwhile.

[rajadaja]

Nice!!! When I was a kid (early 80's) I started noticing the aerodynamic improvements in the big rigs when we went on road trips . I created a drawing of what I thought they might look like in 5 years. Your truck reminds me of what my child-like optimism foresaw. If I stumble on the pic I'll try to post.
Do you have any information on how much additional weight has been added? Do you have any special strategies for when there is no load? Do you also have habits/behaviors that help you increase your mileage?