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

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-01-2013, 10:29 AM   #111 (permalink)
Not Ordinary Engineering
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Alabama
Posts: 57
Thanks: 9
Thanked 26 Times in 13 Posts
Hey guys, I see some of you are concerned about digitally finding your frontal area and looking up your Cd values so you can calculate your CdA but why?

CdA is what we call Flat plate Drag (FPD) in the field. FPD is simple to use and is the coefficient needed to calculate drag (or vise versa in our situation). It produces easy to compare values for your baseline and modification data.

Flat Plate Drag uses the same equation we are already familiar with:

Drag = 0.5*density*velocity^2*FPD

(honestly, what it does is set Cd to 1.0 to remove it from the equation, then your comparisons are in fictional areas with a Cd of 1.0)

Do you guys have a test methodology for determining drag?

Is there a standard for testing yet? Is that something I could help put together?


-Ryan

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 02-21-2013, 03:11 PM   #112 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Blue Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada
Posts: 180

Cruze Eco MT - '12 Chevrolet Cruze Eco MT
Team Chevy
90 day: 44.29 mpg (US)
Thanks: 15
Thanked 58 Times in 37 Posts
Hi all, first post here. I have a '12 Chevy Cruze Eco MT and so far I am very impressed with the mileage as well as the car. For a car used ~95% for commuting it is really working out well.

I looked through your list here and didn't see any info for the Cruze so I thought I'd make a contribution:

Width = 1796mm/70.7in
Height = 1476mm/58.1in
Height = 1466mm/57.7in (Eco/RS*)
Cd = 0.331**
Cd = 0.298 (Eco)

Doing the math I get a CdA of 7.649 for the standard Cruze, and 6.839 for the Eco.

*- Eco height is standard car height -10mm; I couldn't find a spec for the Eco height but it uses the RS package springs making it 0.4in/10mm lower than the standard car.

**- Eco Cd is 0.298, according to GM this is a 10% improvement over the regular Cruze, so 0.298/0.9 = 0.331

EDIT: Added 0.81 correction factor to calculations

Last edited by Blue Angel; 02-21-2013 at 03:19 PM.. Reason: Added 0.81 factor to FA
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Blue Angel For This Useful Post:
aerohead (02-23-2013)
Old 03-07-2013, 01:57 PM   #113 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
NeilBlanchard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maynard, MA Eaarth
Posts: 7,859

Mica Blue - '05 Scion xA RS 2.0
Team Toyota
90 day: 42.48 mpg (US)

Forest - '15 Nissan Leaf S
Team Nissan
90 day: 156.46 mpg (US)

Number 7 - '15 VW e-Golf SEL
TEAM VW AUDI Group
90 day: 155.81 mpg (US)
Thanks: 3,361
Thanked 2,864 Times in 1,802 Posts
The VW XL1 frontal area is 1.50 sq m which is 16.146 sq ft. The Cd is 0.189, so the CdA is just 3.05 sq ft.
__________________
Sincerely, Neil

http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to NeilBlanchard For This Useful Post:
aerohead (08-06-2016)
Old 04-02-2013, 02:45 AM   #114 (permalink)
Mechanical engineer
 
Vekke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kitee (Finland)
Posts: 987

Siitin - '98 Seat Cordoba Vario
90 day: 58.56 mpg (US)

VW Lupo 3L --> 2L - '00 VolksWagen Lupo 3L
Diesel
90 day: 104.94 mpg (US)

A8 luxury fuel sipper - '97 Audi A8 1.2 TDI 6 speed manual
90 day: 64.64 mpg (US)

Audi A4B6 Avant Niistäjä - '02 Audi A4b6 1.9tdi 96kW 3L
90 day: 54.57 mpg (US)

Tourekki - '04 VW Touareg 2.5TDI R5 6 speed manual
90 day: 32.98 mpg (US)

A2 1.4TDI - '03 Audi A2 1.4 TDI
90 day: 45.68 mpg (US)
Thanks: 173
Thanked 507 Times in 221 Posts
Is this mentioned already?
Ilmanvastuskertoimia
__________________


https://www.linkedin.com/in/vesatiainen/

Vesa Tiainen innovation engineer and automotive enthusiast
  Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Vekke For This Useful Post:
aerohead (05-28-2014), Piwoslaw (04-04-2013), renault_megane_dci (08-09-2013)
Old 04-03-2013, 05:24 PM   #115 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 11,271
Thanks: 18,113
Thanked 5,994 Times in 3,649 Posts
flat plate drag coefficient

Quote:
Originally Posted by ryannoe View Post
Hey guys, I see some of you are concerned about digitally finding your frontal area and looking up your Cd values so you can calculate your CdA but why?

CdA is what we call Flat plate Drag (FPD) in the field. FPD is simple to use and is the coefficient needed to calculate drag (or vise versa in our situation). It produces easy to compare values for your baseline and modification data.

Flat Plate Drag uses the same equation we are already familiar with:

Drag = 0.5*density*velocity^2*FPD

(honestly, what it does is set Cd to 1.0 to remove it from the equation, then your comparisons are in fictional areas with a Cd of 1.0)

Do you guys have a test methodology for determining drag?

Is there a standard for testing yet? Is that something I could help put together?


-Ryan
Road vehicle coefficients of aerodynamic drag,as a convention,are always presented as pertaining to frontal projected area.
If we know the original Cd,if only the shape of the vehicle is modified,and a change in mpg shows up,there is a metric by which we can reverse-engineer the new Cd.
The best method to measure drag will remain the full-scale wind tunnel.At $435-$2,000 an hour,they're kind of pricey (and if you can book time in one).
Coast-down testing is so problematic,that while not 'impossible' to pull off,most auto makers have gone to the wind tunnel for results instead.
Computational Fluid Dynamics,while better than ever,is so expensive that it remains within the domain of universities and auto makers.
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2013, 07:22 AM   #116 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
euromodder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Belgium
Posts: 4,666

GasDwarf - '13 Volkswagen up! EcoFuel CNG
Thanks: 176
Thanked 641 Times in 508 Posts
VW up!
Cd = 0.32
Frontal area = 22.28 sq.ft.
CdA = 7,13

That's not too bad for such a small car - 3.54m or just under 12 ft.
__________________
GasDwarf's fuel consumption :

Last edited by euromodder; 07-07-2013 at 06:32 PM..
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to euromodder For This Useful Post:
aerohead (08-06-2016)
Old 04-04-2013, 05:44 PM   #117 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
GeekForLife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Richmond Texas
Posts: 25

White Elephant - '07 Toyota Tundra SR5
90 day: 19.27 mpg (US)
Thanks: 34
Thanked 9 Times in 4 Posts
Either I am misunderstanding the formula or the numbers on the chart are wrong.

Someone check my math here I may be suffering from slept through math-atitis

The first car on the list
Acura CL 1997-1999 Height = 54.7 Width = 70.1
frontal area = 21.6 ft^2

My math

54.7*70.1*.84/144=22.37 ft^2
Am I daft or is the page wrong????
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2013, 06:13 PM   #118 (permalink)
Slow steppin'
 
Coroner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Bryan, Ohio
Posts: 30

2013 Coachman 21QBC - '12 Chevy Express 4500 RV
Thanks: 5
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
2011 Kia Forte Hatchback:

cd: .29 - Edmunds
Height: 57.5"
Width: 69.9"
Frontal Area: 23.45 sq ft (includes .84 correction)
cdA: 6.8009


I didn't see any Kia's, so here's one.
__________________
If you pay for my gas, I'll go faster...
I brake for tailgaters...
Poop management professional, it seems...

Last edited by Coroner; 04-13-2013 at 06:18 PM.. Reason: added .84
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Coroner For This Useful Post:
aerohead (08-06-2016)
Old 04-13-2013, 06:53 PM   #119 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,733

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,571
Thanked 3,507 Times in 2,194 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeekForLife View Post
Either I am misunderstanding the formula or the numbers on the chart are wrong.

Someone check my math here I may be suffering from slept through math-atitis

The first car on the list
Acura CL 1997-1999 Height = 54.7 Width = 70.1
frontal area = 21.6 ft^2

My math

54.7*70.1*.84/144=22.37 ft^2
Am I daft or is the page wrong????
Looks to me like .81 was the frontal area "correction factor" used.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Frank Lee For This Useful Post:
aerohead (08-06-2016)
Old 06-16-2013, 07:26 PM   #120 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Jack-Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Germany
Posts: 124

Partygurke - '90 VW Polo 2F
TEAM VW AUDI Group

Rodi - '04 Smart Roadster Coupe
Thanks: 2
Thanked 58 Times in 37 Posts
Hello,

VW Polo 2F (BJ 1991-1994) Coupe :
cw= 0,36
A=1,84m²

Not bad for this "coalbox"

Greetings,
Patrick

  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Jack-Lee For This Useful Post:
aerohead (08-06-2016)
Reply  Post New Thread


Tags
cda list

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
List of Low Rolling Resistance Tires Daox EcoModding Central 57 05-13-2019 01:17 AM
What are your 2008 mod goals / wish list? MetroMPG EcoModding Central 45 01-02-2009 01:57 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