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

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 12-11-2020, 06:13 PM   #11 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: italy
Posts: 11
Thanks: 3
Thanked 7 Times in 3 Posts
This is the final result! I'm sorry for the bad quality of this photo but it's a several days it's has been raining all days and i haven't been able to take a good photo with a good light.
However the panel is quite invisible and so are the screws.


  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to desgeegee For This Useful Post:
aerohead (12-16-2020)
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 12-16-2020, 05:22 AM   #12 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: italy
Posts: 11
Thanks: 3
Thanked 7 Times in 3 Posts
Yesterday i tried to do the Coast Down Test for Cd evaluation:
-7 test from 180kph* (about 112 mph) to 90/80Kph* (about 56/50 mph). *Speed from speedometer. ( 7 test, 4 in one direction and 3 in the opposite direction, because the trial road isn't very flat)
- I use elm 327 interface + Forscan to record all data (time, fuel, real speed)
- Several months ago I found an excel file that models the experiment for the evaluation of Cd and the resistance rolling coefficient, by inserting some characteristics of your car like mass, frontal area, etc plus the insertion of the actual speed that you find.

I edited this file because i don't like playing with two variables to minimize the error between the model speed and the actual speed, so i modeled the Crr with the Stuttgart rolling resistance coefficient which depends on Speed and Tire pressure.

The results are:
Cd= 0.272 ( i think it's quite reliable)

Error= 0.37 ( i think it's acceptable)



What do you think about it? Any suggestions?

After finish the diffuser, i'll try again of course!

Last edited by desgeegee; 12-16-2020 at 08:44 AM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2020, 10:45 AM   #13 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 292
Thanks: 220
Thanked 109 Times in 86 Posts
Is the error factor larger than the actual results?
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2020, 01:00 PM   #14 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,060
Thanks: 107
Thanked 1,594 Times in 1,131 Posts
I think it is impossible to accurately calculate Cd* by coastdown tests, without very sophisticated data gathering (including real time wind/yaw) and very good modelling (including all rotational inertias).

Given the high speeds you are using, it might be possible to measure some relative changes in drag. Do the tests again with windows up / windows down and see how much consistent difference in speeds you can record after 50 seconds.

(* let alone to three decimal places!!)
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2020, 01:26 PM   #15 (permalink)
Moderator
 
Vman455's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 1,847

Pope Pious the Prius - '13 Toyota Prius Two
Team Toyota
SUV
90 day: 51.9 mpg (US)

Tycho the Truck - '91 Toyota Pickup DLX 4WD
90 day: 24.12 mpg (US)
Thanks: 197
Thanked 1,649 Times in 868 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by JulianEdgar View Post
I think it is impossible to accurately calculate Cd* by coastdown tests, without very sophisticated data gathering (including real time wind/yaw) and very good modelling (including all rotational inertias).

Given the high speeds you are using, it might be possible to measure some relative changes in drag. Do the tests again with windows up / windows down and see how much consistent difference in speeds you can record after 50 seconds.

(* let alone to three decimal places!!)
After trying coast down testing several times this summer, I agree with all of this. It was just about impossible to get data consistent enough to show a change in drag with the windows up versus down, let alone try to calculate the cD with that spreadsheet (which I tried the first time. It came up with a radically different cR and higher cD with windows up than down!).

I wish there was anywhere here that I could do 100+ mph legally.
__________________



  Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2020, 03:32 PM   #16 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: italy
Posts: 11
Thanks: 3
Thanked 7 Times in 3 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by MeteorGray View Post
Is the error factor larger than the actual results?
Yes it is and this is the data that gives me doubts. If you see the table, this error factor depends mostly by the difference between Vactual and Vmodel of 30 and 50 seconds.

30s: I've 107,6-107,4-109,1-103,2-104,2-106,4-108,2
Vmodel: 107,9 kph
I think that the only way to fix this "problem" is to collect more data and
do more test.
50s:Here there aren't some data due the traffic that forced me to brake..

What about to consider the mode and not the average(statistic mean(?))?

I need to do again this test in a major proper way of course
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2020, 03:41 PM   #17 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: italy
Posts: 11
Thanks: 3
Thanked 7 Times in 3 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by JulianEdgar View Post
I think it is impossible to accurately calculate Cd* by coastdown tests, without very sophisticated data gathering (including real time wind/yaw) and very good modelling (including all rotational inertias).

Given the high speeds you are using, it might be possible to measure some relative changes in drag. Do the tests again with windows up / windows down and see how much consistent difference in speeds you can record after 50 seconds.

(* let alone to three decimal places!!)
Yes this test isn't intended to find the real Cd but to find a "good" method (or refine and fix it for a better estimate)
to estimate it and make relative comparisons with the various upgrade made
I will do the Windows Up/Down test. I promise
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2020, 03:42 PM   #18 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,060
Thanks: 107
Thanked 1,594 Times in 1,131 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by desgeegee View Post
Yes it is and this is the data that gives me doubts. If you see the table, this error factor depends mostly by the difference between Vactual and Vmodel of 30 and 50 seconds.

30s: I've 107,6-107,4-109,1-103,2-104,2-106,4-108,2
Vmodel: 107,9 kph
I think that the only way to fix this "problem" is to collect more data and
do more test.
50s:Here there aren't some data due the traffic that forced me to brake..

What about to consider the mode and not the average(statistic mean(?))?

I need to do again this test in a major proper way of course
You will be wasting your time unless you do a basic test of a change that does alter drag - eg windows up / windows down - and ensure you can measure it. Chasing imaginary changes is no fun.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to JulianEdgar For This Useful Post:
desgeegee (12-16-2020)
Old 12-16-2020, 03:49 PM   #19 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: italy
Posts: 11
Thanks: 3
Thanked 7 Times in 3 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vman455 View Post
After trying coast down testing several times this summer, I agree with all of this. It was just about impossible to get data consistent enough to show a change in drag with the windows up versus down, let alone try to calculate the cD with that spreadsheet (which I tried the first time. It came up with a radically different cR and higher cD with windows up than down!).

I wish there was anywhere here that I could do 100+ mph legally.
I think is quite impossible to calculate the Cr without all coefficients and data of tyre and tarmac.. i used the formula that at least considers pressure and speed but i know there is an approximation error

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com