Blade Runner Redux - Tesla Cybertruck!

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Give no attention to driving while autopilot is engaged, then have a semi pull out in front of you.

The new 'Darwin Moments.'

[aerohead]

Other than the F-117 Nighthawk,some vehicles I found,which don't allow the air to remain at frontal area for more than a 'blink' are:
1995 Dodge Viper Defender show car
2005 Pagani Zonda
2006 Daihatsu UFE-III concept
2009 Nissan Z-car
2011 Jaguar C-X75 concept
2011 Nissan JUKE
2011 Land Rover Range Rover Evoque
2011 LEXUS LFA
2012 Porsche 911 Carrera S
2012 McLaren MP4-12C
2013 Porsche Cayman S
2013 SRT Viper
2015 Ferrari LaFerrari
No doubt,we should expect immediate flow separation downstream of Cybertruck's roof apex,however,the locked-vortex produced there,may produce the 'missing' contour which allows for rapid,spatial reattachment of the inviscid 'sound' flow outside it.I suspect that this is the case for every aspect of Cybertruck's body.

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by aerohead

Hucho is absolutely adamant about non-aspirated structures on road vehicles.Slots,slats,and spoilers can perform on an aircraft in 2-D flow,but never on an automobile in 3-D flow.

https://d2d0b2rxqzh1q5.cloudfront.ne...cc66dcc08a.jpg

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by freebeard

https://d2d0b2rxqzh1q5.cloudfront.ne...cc66dcc08a.jpg

I was specifically addressing Kachi's pickup slotted cab wing,or any other kind of 2D-flow device.Hucho's tested them all,and they're all a fail as far as drag reduction goes.And box-cavities won't work either if they're 'porous.'

[freebeard]

Hucho is absolutely adamant...

I was questioning Hucho rather than you. I think the example differs because it is out front in quasi-laminar flow. I don't understand those F1 wings at all.

OTOH, 2D flow devices exist in theory, but where would one be found in real life?

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by freebeard

I was questioning Hucho rather than you. I think the example differs because it is out front in quasi-laminar flow. I don't understand those F1 wings at all.

OTOH, 2D flow devices exist in theory, but where would one be found in real life?

Okay,now I'm pretty confused.I was addressing something in the back of a vehicle which would reduce drag,other than a boat tail or box-cavity.And Hucho says that such a thing does not exist.
If we're talking about the F-1 car,then everything you see if for high speed stability and cornering force at minimum drag,where Cd 1.0 might be considered low drag.I don't have any interest in racing cars,other than speed record cars.That's the only place we'd have a chance to see low drag.And the lower the horsepower category the better.
PS And as to 2D flow,that would be with wings,elevators,longerons,canards,struts,pylons,ta nks,and horizontal stabilizers at flight conditions.You can't have that kind of flow with an automobile.The presence of the ground plane makes it impossible.

[freebeard]

Okay,now I'm pretty confused.I was addressing something in the back of a vehicle which would reduce drag,other than a boat tail or box-cavity.And Hucho says that such a thing does not exist.

Imagine how I must feel. I think I took the quote in too broad a context.

But... If wings are a [non-spanwise] 2D flow, why is the Prandtl-D so effective? Rudders not 2D?

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Imagine how I must feel. I think I took the quote in too broad a context.

But... If wings are a [non-spanwise] 2D flow, why is the Prandtl-D so effective? Rudders not 2D?

I'm not familiar with it,can you help me out?

[Xist]

I think the front wing is supposed to move air over the tire.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Xist

I think the front wing is supposed to move air over the tire.

Teams are going to use any trick they can get away with,just staying within bounds of the rule book.That will include any drag savings (speed on straights) if at no cost to downforce (cornering speed),and weight (acceleration and braking).It's a fine balance.