Engineering Explained:Why Tesla's Are Bad at Towing

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by freebeard

For reals? CAD simulation? Thought experiment?

Needs NASCAR roof fences?

I'm looking forward to this.

In 1980,SAE published a 2-book set on fuel economy.They had the truck aerodynamics research data from NASA and Freightliner.Hucho is included as well.NASA's is available online.With these materials,along with the GM/AeroVironment Sunraycer data/Goro Tamai' The Leading Edge,MIT solar racing team book,we have enough material to analyze virtually any vehicle combination,by reverse-engineering,and careful estimations.That's all engineers can do.All the formulas are at the top of the Aero Forum page,with the calculator.Unless your a millionaire,there won't be any CFD that would do us any good.
Roof fences would only threaten rollover safety I'm afraid.The less transverse flow separation the better.I wouldn't really call it an experiment,this is mechanical engineering.Figure 6-hours to do a single trailer combination.One drawing took over 20-hours.
So far,the take-away is,there's nothing wrong pulling a trailer with an EV.All the problems are with the trailers.Even the Bowlus is 'wrong' by 50%.

[Grant-53]

See the SAE Automotive Engineering magazine for detailed information. Understand that appropriate technology is a function of the available resources and local conditions. EV do well in an urban driving cycle. Outside the city limits a hybrid vehicle has the advantage. Whatever religious or political views we may have affects our preferences but inanimate technology doesn't care. Buy the shovel or screwdriver that fits your hand then use it safely and responsibly.

I use some of the same reference books Aerohead mentioned in designing body shells for upright bikes.

[freebeard]

Unless your a millionaire,there won't be any CFD that would do us any good.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=why+blender+is+free

Free and Open Source software is superior to pay-by-the-seat software. The physics engines and OpenVDB are in there. Someone no doubt is sharpening that tool right now. If the hardware is a problem, Amazon will rent you space in the cloud.

Above my pay grade, unfortunately.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Grant-53

See the SAE Automotive Engineering magazine for detailed information. Understand that appropriate technology is a function of the available resources and local conditions. EV do well in an urban driving cycle. Outside the city limits a hybrid vehicle has the advantage. Whatever religious or political views we may have affects our preferences but inanimate technology doesn't care. Buy the shovel or screwdriver that fits your hand then use it safely and responsibly.

Show me that zero-carbon hybrid and you'll have a conversation.Has the SAE been completely populated by morons? Perhaps the hybrid advantage comes at the cost of the planet? Think locally,act locally? Can you conceive of a world in which preference is de-linked from religion or politics,and is driven by exclusively by knowledge and awareness ?

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by aerohead

Show me that zero-carbon hybrid and you'll have a conversation.Has the SAE been completely populated by morons? Perhaps the hybrid advantage comes at the cost of the planet? Think locally,act locally? Can you conceive of a world in which preference is de-linked from religion or politics,and is driven by exclusively by knowledge and awareness ?

Show me a zero-carbon vehicle of any sort. If no emissions is the only acceptable standard, then killing oneself is the only rational conclusion. Fortunately, zero is not necessary.

I can't conceive of a world without politics and religion (loosely defined) because those are the only mechanisms to derive value and assign social authority. A world without those things is comatose; a vegetative state. That's the only way for humans to be technically living, but without meaning.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Show me a zero-carbon vehicle of any sort. If no emissions is the only acceptable standard, then killing oneself is the only rational conclusion. Fortunately, zero is not necessary.

I can't conceive of a world without politics and religion (loosely defined) because those are the only mechanisms to derive value and assign social authority. A world without those things is comatose; a vegetative state. That's the only way for humans to be technically living, but without meaning.

You know very well that the context is,that once the vehicle is manufactured,and in service,that it's 'fuel' source is renewable.Politics and religion has never been part of my consumer calculus.I have no personal experience with a world like that.Your example has no resonance for me.I experience no shortage of 'meaning.'
While humans have probably never experienced life without hierarchy,some probably have existed without politics.
We're not allowed to discuss religion.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by aerohead

I experience no shortage of 'meaning.'

Then you experience no shortage of faith in things that cannot be proven. You've assigned value to things absent any proof of the "goodness" of it. That's what I mean by religion. Everyone has it. Those that don't are comatose.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Then you experience no shortage of faith in things that cannot be proven. You've assigned value to things absent any proof of the "goodness" of it. That's what I mean by religion. Everyone has it. Those that don't are comatose.

Faith is not part of my life.I'll settle for what is.'Goodness' is a subjective word.It can't be quantified.There are no 'Goodness-o-meters.'I attempt to incorporate no such language in my communications.To say that 'everyone' implies that you personally know 7.5-billion people,and their most secret and privileged thoughts.That's hard to abide by.Americans are described by some as, mindless automatons,wandering aimlessly in the dark,muttering incantations.Is it these that you believe comatose?
How much proof do you need,that if you were to be pushed off El Capitan,at Yosemite Park,that in all likelihood you would not survive the fall.You have no a priori knowledge.It remains an unproven theory until you're pushed.Do you cling to that theory in the face of uncertainty? The theory has value,absent any proof?

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by aerohead

Faith is not part of my life.I'll settle for what is.'Goodness' is a subjective word.It can't be quantified.There are no 'Goodness-o-meters.'I attempt to incorporate no such language in my communications.

A decision involves value, and value derives from faith in unprovable things. There isn't a single thing defined or proven that does not have at its root, an assumption that can be proven or defined.

Blindness to faith is not evidence of lack of faith.

[freebeard]

I think the forum ate my post?

Show me a zero-carbon vehicle of any sort. If no emissions is the only acceptable standard, then killing oneself is the only rational conclusion.

Thank goodness there is a loophole!

A bamboo bicycle from 1896

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bamboo_bicycle

A decision may involve impulsiveness.