Ford F150 - 25% drag reduction
 

Hi everyone,

using a 3D scan of the Ford F150 and a bunch of aerodynamic simulations, we demonstrated how the aerodynamic drag of a Ford F150 can be reduced by 25% - see this link:
youtube.com/watch?v=E0ass_AxloM

Of course, the suggested solutions can compromise the design & practicality. Nevertheless, it's interesting to see how the Cybertruck for example is leaning towards a similar "base profile" which allows for good pressure recovery (but it's sharp edges may be a problem).

Looking forward to your comments!

'Cd 0.463'
 

Member AeroStealth owns a 2014 Ford F-150 Eco-Boost, Crew Cab, 6.5-foot bed,4X4 pickup.
Ford Motor Company published Cd 0.404 for this pickup.
AeroStealth purchased member Bondo's ( Brett Herndon ) Aerolid and Aerotail, both wind tunnel tested, courtesy of the Ford Motor Company.
With the two modifications, the F-150 was reduced to Cd 0.306. A 24.25% drag reduction.
While Ford Motor has never published an official drag coefficient for the current F-150, it seems unlikely that it's drag coefficient has 'increased' by 14.6% since 2014.
In his Master's Thesis of 2011 at Chalmers University, Martin Olsson reported that the Lattice Boltzmann Method ( LBM ) CFD used, produced a 13% discrepancy between wind tunnel tests of the same model.
Does AirShaper employ LMB?

@wouterremmerie : Great to have you here !
I'm the one that suggested that you visit the forums here.
A very, very warm welcome to you.

I PMed the OP. Haven't heard back or seen a third post.

Ah, thanks a lot for the tip, happy to be here!
Great place to discuss real improvements / real gains in terms of aerodynamics - cool community!

Hi Freebeard,

sorry, new to this forum, you mean I should post more regularly to prove I'm not a bot / simply spamming?

Happy to answer any questions you may have - I'm real :)

Hi Aerohead,

no, we use a finite volume method:
this has been the default method for decades, although I do believe LBM could be (one of) the winning methods for the future.

Regarding drag values:
without discrediting the manufacurers, the claimed values are usually fairly optimistic (as they sometimes play with ride heights, rims, aircon settings, etc during testing).

We performed an independent validation on a Tesla Model Y together with one of our partners - our Cd value was less than 6% off compared to the measured value. And qualitative data (the flow structure behind the car) also showed good correlation:
airshaper.com/blog/tesla-model-y-aerodynamic-benchmarking

I would agree drag hasn't increased by 14%, so it's likely more a matter of comparing the right data here. Data coming from different sources and/or different measuring techniques (tunnel vs simulation) can blur the whole story.

No, it was more that some new posters never get past one or two posts. 'Hit and run'.

I look forward to where the conversation goes.

Yeah me too!

Where to start?

Does or could Airshaper benefit from OpenVDB? I think it and an AI interface like Stable Diffusion as a front end show the most promise.