GasPods: stick on airfoils
GasPods are designed to make driving less of a drag. Chances are, at some point you’ve seen vehicles that were designed with streamlined little knobs on their hoods or roofs, to improve their aerodynamics. While such features have been shown to work, they generally haven’t been available as an aftermarket product. Now, however, if you want those knobs on your car, you can buy them – in the form of GasPods.
GasPods are designed to make driving less of a drag |
No.
|
Data? I didn't think so.
|
GasPods data
Sorry I didn't provide it in the original post. The GasPods data is on their website at - [link to site removed by admin - Google Gaspods, if you like.]
I have no financial interest in or compensation from GasPods in any way shape or form. |
I see a lot of testimony and nice numbers, "Initial Field Studies validate the computational results with participants realizing fuel savings of between 4% and 19%", but no methodology or control to realize a solid baseline.
I'm thinking wind tunnel data would be reliable, but as seen on the Mitsubishi Evo, improvement is realistically less than 2% after extensive testing on placement. |
Vortex generators, again
They contribute to very specific aircraft aerodynamic effects but everything else depends on ... location, location, location. Without CFD/tunnel testing on your particular vehicle shape/forms, applied at wrong locations these things may not contribute and even cost aero-efficiencies.
NASA - Micro-Vortex Generators Enhance Aircraft Performance http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/ca...2010003963.pdf http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/cor...004/16E_03.pdf |
|
I'm willing to believe that VGs (or GasPods, or whatever you want to call them) may help in certain configurations, on certain cars. I'm also willing to believe that someone who knows something about both aerodynamics and A-B-A-B testing may be able to get an improvement. But unless s/he spends 8 hours per day at freeway speeds, it might not be worth the investment. The average driver who drives a block to the store 5 times a day is another story.
Reducing fuel consumption by 4% is almost believable, 19% is not. A Kammback is worth 5-10% on most cars, while a full boattail is 10-20%. Oh, look, my horse has a VG on its forehead! Should we park this in the U Corral? I'm not totally convinced since VG can help fuel economy, but the numbers (both FC reduction, and price) are outragous. EDIT: Chaz got a better pic:) |
While vortex generators are not unicorns they aren't easy to use correctly. I'm currently simulating vortex generators on my car with CFD software. Placement and sizing are critical to get a positive effect from them. Placement and sizing are also dependent on several factors like boundary layer thickness and flow separation.
Its very easy to create more drag using them. Here is a link to a picture of an unsuccessful placement I did. (Note the two large detachment bubbles) ImageShack® - Online Photo and Video Hosting |
Very cool simulation ConnClark!
|
2 Attachment(s)
In my opinion VG's are to be used when air flow needs to go around a curve that would normally have detached turbulent flow such as the the very back fuselage of a 737 or the aft side of an airplane wing at the flaps. They in themselves create minor drag that can be harnessed to eliminate major drag.
|
Quote:
They won't give the claimed results regarding FE though. Despite their tiny size, they ARE working on my A pillars and mirrors . (noise reduction & altered water flow on side windows) Yet I fail to see how what is essentially a half-teardrop (and even described by the manufacturer as such) would create a vortex powerful enough to have some effect. The idea behind a VG is to create a serious vortex, hence they are normally not streamlined shapes. |
Quote:
|
The fact that the company is seeking testimonial evidence from customers interested in participating in "field trials", rather than posting quality 3rd party data says all we need to know about how effective these things are going to be for the vast majority of applications.
We know some of the MPG claims being made are so far out of the realm of possibility as to be laughable. Also laughable: Quote:
|
Quote:
Link to an example of bumps in action Pectoral fins of humpback whales inspire new flight technology |
I can 'buy' that as a semi-universal stick-on, one might see benefit from a zigzag at the trailing edge of necessarily truncated foils intended to invoke flow separation - like deck extension spoilers or kammbacks or side mirrors. I can also accept that under the right conditions and with exactly correct placement these gaspods can reduce drag by a tiny percent. Like many unicorns (in any industry, not only ecomodding), there's an element of plausibility if every condition is met exactly right and if a problem actually exists to address in the first place. I find it unlikely an average user can expect meaningful improvements from arbitrary placement - but I guess if it makes them feel good or if the presence of the bumps provoke conversation or thoughts about energy consumption, that can be a useful effect.
Still seems like the sort of thing the corral was meant for, unicorns are always free to grow wings and fly outta' there if they're strong enough. |
Quote:
Moved to the corral for now, mainly because it's better that people are skeptical of the product. (And the countdown begins for our first non-scientific testimonial new user to sign up...) |
Why put them in front of the windshield on the blue wagon? they are placed right at the low pressure zone before the windshield. If any effect is wanted from them they should of been placed further ahead where the air flow is stronger for them to interact in. To be honest the hood needs a cowling to direct the air away from the windshield not to it.
On the rear VG's appear to be in the air stream with no real purpose. They are not attaching the airflow nor directing it anywhere. They become Hood Ornaments in the wrong hands. Its all about placement, first you have to understand how they will interact with the airflow then how you can use that to your cars benefit. Smoke testing would be a effective way to test the effect of the placement. |
Request permission to move information to Aerodynamics
Quote:
[link to site removed by admin - Google Gaspods, if you like ] Same firm that does the same modeling for BMW, Mercedes, Ford, most of the industry. And, GasPods are not vortex generators. Request permission to have thread moved to aerodynamics. Yes, I am President of AeroHance, makers of GasPods. |
Metro you are astute
Of course they are not Vortex generators.. they are gaspods and do not interact effectively with the air at all. Only in the make believe world of your SIMULATIONS do they perform,The placement of them is laughable see my above post. Please explain the pre windshield placement of them and the science behind it. Also the end of the roof placement of them and the science behind it. see the marketing video below http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMHOLTatXLM&feature=plcp |
This is quickly becoming my favorite thread.
This testimonial result is +18%, even better than the CFD reduction in Cd, and that's on an Audi that's already limited by throttle loss. For a Cd of -5% you'd think the MPG would be more like +2%. I know a guy who gets 32 MPG in a similar Audi. He's a jack-rabbit (goes without saying of Audi drivers), doesn't particularly hypermile, but drives the speed limit. Email her and let her know she can gain 2MPG by taking them off. Reminds me of how a doctor who recommended a product made by the company I work for claimed our laser is 50% efficient "electrical-to-optical." I design lasers (but not that particular laser, thank heavens), and I worked that number out to 2.5%. I pointed this out to the company - guess who's word is in the marketing literature? But seriously, I'm sad that VG's don't seem to work in the real world on the 80's-90's sedans rear windsheild problem. That's exactly where you'd expect them to work (I'd expect them to work). Not as well as a Kammback or boattail, mind... |
Quote:
Susanne, If a team of Japanese engineers with a wind tunnel, super computers, months of time, and a mission statement can only realize a 2% reduction in drag using "Not Vortex Generators" remarkably similar in shape and general placement of GasPods by AeroHance, How is it people can get a 20% increase in fuel mileage by just slapping these on where it seems right? As someone who has put 55,000 miles on my Honda and kept track of every gallon during this time, I can tell you my mileage varies from 28 to 42 MPG per tank, so someone just saying "Shucky Darn, I be getting 4 MPG gooder fuel E Fish in Sea!!" just does not get it. This Ecomodder forum is a very unfavorable place for you to try and gain any sort of foothold in credibility points, we're a skeptical bunch, and generally have figured out quite a bit about road vehicle aerodynamics. Your marketing of these GasPods smells of a scam along the lines of HHO generators, fuel line magnets, LED light therapy devices, water ionizers and snake oil. You don't have a shred of actual test data on your site showing results of an ABA test that demonstrates a significant reduction in the Cd of a vehicle. Living out on the West Coast, it would be a simple thing for you to go find a hill, and roll down it in neutral keeping track of your speed with and without the GasPods a bunch of times on different vehicles to get real data. If you can show the car goes faster with the GasPods than without, you have something. My guess is you've tried this, and it didn't work out too well. But, since you aren't going to let significant facts stand in the way of a good marketing plan, you're charging ahead anyway. Unfortunately for you, this Ecomodder place has you on its radar, so anyone searching Google will likely run into us here and read what we say, warts and all. If you want to rise above, get testing, show us your methodology, and results. Tell us what it is doing and how it is reducing the drag. Explain the rationale of your "Not Vortex Generators" we'd love to hear it. |
How to properly test modifications (AKA: don't believe every MPG claim you read)
We don't want to believe, we want to know. We want raw data, not computer images and "I could hear the engine using less gas" testimonies. If GasPods reduce fuel consumption by up to 19%, then please tell us how this was tested (vehicle, GasPod placement, test track and instrumentation details, etc.). If you like, then we can organize our own testing and if we get similar results, then we will not only stop being sceptical, but we will praise you for the simplicity of your invention. Susanne, with all due respect, we are not saying GasPods don't work, we are saying that the FE claims are outrageous. In the posts above we've told you why, now we ask that you explain to us (in a scientific manner) why we are wrong in our opinion. |
18% isn't just a lot. It would be revolutionary.
It would take all of the lesser extreme aero mods in the ecomodder arsenal to get near 20%. Here are some more realistic aero mod numbers: 2%-3% side mirror delete. 2%-3% grill block 2%-3% rear wheel skirts 2%-4% smooth wheel covers 3%-4% belly pan 4% kammback 3%-5% front air dam 7%-8% pickup fast back or aero shell bed cover 10% full boat tail 14% deleting a big ugly OEM roof rack. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Can you please explain how they work when they are not VGs ? On that very page, it seems that you want them to do the very thing VGs do, energise and bend the airflow to conform to a shape it normally wouldn't conform to. |
Quote:
First, you may wish to read this page to understand why you're facing skepticism here: http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...uel-15251.html Re: "I ... invite you to read the scientific basis" ... I'm sure folks here would welcome the chance to read the full research report by the testing company in question. Is that available on your web site? I wonder if you have submitted your product to testing good enough to be approved by the EPA Motor Vehicle Aftermarket Retrofit Device Evaluation Program ? If the pods work as well as claimed, wouldn't having the EPA's "seal of approval" be marketing gold? Surely worth the investment. |
...paraphrasing Cuba Gooding Jr's statement: "...show me the FACTS..."
...it's all about "...FACTS & proof..." not "...FAITH & promises..."! |
Anybody who's started a business necessarily has to be that business' biggest fan, and defend their business against attacks whether legitimate or baseless. I can't blame the company president for arriving in defense of her business.
It is important to be aware that while some people respect testimonials, others do not. Possibly because of the era in which I was raised, or the nature of my experiences in this world I've come to understand that all marketing claims are outright lies. Sting-free sunburn ointment stings like hell. You still have to do a lot of old fashioned scrubbing when you use Scrubbing Bubbles bathroom cleaner. No movie has ever "Blown Me Away!", whatever that even means. - even claims that aren't outright lies are usually stupid, of course the 2013 BMW is the "Best BMW Yet®" .. why would you make it worse than last year's? You want to sell me a product? Underwhelm me. Tell me, with absolute certainty, the least I can possibly expect from it. Let the product surprise me by outperforming my expectations. THAT would blow me away. Whatever that means. The company I work for, for example, makes amplifiers. We'll tell you it makes 45 watts per channel on the box because that's the absolute minimum the design might make - but the individual device you receive will always outperform the ratings you expected. The problem we face is that people are so accustomed to being lied to by everyone else that they have no idea what a correctly measured standard is. They will wonder why our 45 watt amplifier is $400 when a 500 watt amplifier is $12.55 .. a watt's a watt, right? A 18% improvement from one tank of gas to the next under utterly uncontrolled circumstances clearly indicates that the stick-on, universal plastic thingie causes all cars driven under all conditions to improve by 18% right? Those silly automotive engineers on whom we depend with our very lives to design braking systems and collision safety systems which work well, sure can't seem to get aerodynamics figured out.... If you want to sell this product to us, don't put testimonials on your site. To a skeptic, testimonials have the opposite effect that you want, we actually avoid products marketed by testimonial because we associate them with bogus claims and failures to perform. Instead, offer extremely modest claims. Approach us with the truth. Your customers are your friends, and one doesn't BS one's friends. Perform coast-down tests with the vehicles you have access to, publish your results and methodology - including failures. This will build trust, and trust builds business. As I said in a prior post, this like many other unicorns probably can actually work under the right conditions and where a problem actually exists in need of correction. It can also serve as a conversation starter, and all fact-based conversations on the topic of resource conservation can be a good thing (nevermind the fuel the UPS truck burns delivering these petroleum-based-plastic objects to us, and the fuel the barge burns while carrying neodymium here from South America... ) If I had a vote, which I don't, it continues to be that this stays in the unicorn corral until such time as it proves itself with more than mere verbal testimonials and pretty simulations. |
To a poster of reason - shovel
As far as testimonials go, if someone is excited, I think they should have the opportunity to be heard. I expect and hope that overtime we'll have many more to share, but they will not be developed by a marketing department. As far as I'm concerned, they'll only be from clients with real world comments.
AeroHance is not based upon 1 testimonial, nor was I the one who posted it here. The press piece - [link to site removed by admin - Google Gaspods, if you like ] - that precipitated this thread gave the following results based upon logging mileage for a minimum - note that all drove much further - of 2,000 miles of driving with and without GasPods on their car. And ranged in results from 1.65% through 11.83%. That is representative of the spread we're seeing so far. Our company is transparent, and as more results come in, and time allows good and bad results will be posted to AeroHance.com. Our goal is to have the broadest cross section of data upon which to grow as we can. I trust that some will get over their initial glee at having a new kid on the block to throw stones at, and join in. [Link to site removed by admin - Google Gaspods, if you like. ] |
No description of the science? No research report? No EPA-approved test methodology? Stated goal of relying on lots and lots of testimonials for marketing (surely many testimonials outweigh the weakness of testimonial evidence in general)?
It appears the major questions/concerns raised in this discussion went over your head or are deemed not important. You may sell a truckload, but I bet you won't find (m)any takers around here. Best of luck with your business! |
Quote:
A gazillion of factors influence fuel consumption. Singling out one, is pretty hard to do. Generally, half the % of drag reduction achieved, is fairly close to the % reduction in fuel consumption. There's simply no way those gaspods are reducing aerodynamic drag by 20+ % ... |
Quote:
|
If you have any substantive research / scientific info to share (your web site's "research" page doesn't really qualify), you are sincerely more than welcome to post links.
We would welcome more information than is currently available on your web site! |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Go find a Hill that is steep enough for you to reach ≈50MPH over 1/4 to 3/4 mile, start coasting your car down it by either A) releasing the break at a start point, or B) be going a certain speed when you pass a start point (5-10mph). Coast down the hill and either A) measure the speed you're going when you pass another landmark, or B) Measure how long it takes to get to your 50MPH to Stop your timed/measured distance run. Now Put your GasPods by AeroHance (I try to mention that as much as possible to bump the Google rating of this thread BTW) on your car, and repeat the process, use 2 or 3 different cars, do this 3 to 4 times with each car. Alternating GasPods On/GasPods Off. Once you get the hang of it, you’ll have a trial done every 5 - 10 minutes. Best if it’s a calm day. Inflate the tires on the cars to at least 40psi for the test. Within a few hours of testing this way, you'll have quantifiable results that show whether GasPods © by AeroHance ™ really work or not. It’s clear that if you have the GasPods on, and it takes less time to reach 50MPH, or you are going faster when you pass your end point, then the GasPods are working. So in the amount of time you have spent typing your posts in here and reading (I really hope you did read what we're trying to say here) our posts, you could have wrapped this up. And here's the best part......I bet you MetroMPGs solid wheel covers, that if you came here with the raw data, there are folks in here who would kill each other for the opportunity to analyze it for you and tell you to the nearest 2 decimal places exactly what the numbers mean. Cause that's just the kinda people there are around here. So, you say there's not much more you can do? I think not. (Unless as I posted previously you already did this and it shows practically no difference) |
GasPods © by AeroHance ™
GasPods by AeroHance GasPods AeroHance Adding tags now. GasPods AeroHance ! |
Quote:
Back on topic. Susanne, showing testimonials instead of hard numbers, you're not going to get a lot of positive feedback at this forum. And the "testing" that you provided can't really be called "hard numbers" as it was hardly rigorous at all. Maybe you'd like to market my cardboard and duct tape aero-modification, that gave a whopping 15% FE improvement on my car? Only it didn't, I just drove the care more carefully. But hey, this would make a great testimonial, wouldn't it? :rolleyes: Still, I think many of us here are eagerly awaiting facts, numbers and graphs regarding AeroHance GasPods. We really love those things. Not testimonials. Regards |
Very entertaining thread!
I wonder if I installed little bumps on my keel,would I win more sailboat races?Maybe I could sew little bumps onto my sails.Yeah thats the ticket! Phil |
GasPods © by AeroHance ™
GasPods by AeroHance GasPods AeroHance GasPods AeroHance ! GasPods © by AeroHance ™ GasPods by AeroHance GasPods AeroHance GasPods AeroHance ! GasPods © by AeroHance ™ GasPods by AeroHance GasPods AeroHance GasPods AeroHance ! LOL! She'll find a few suckers- maybe many, who knows- but the EM boys here have pretty much laid out the facts as we know them and all indications are this is a unicorn and real data will not be forthcoming (as usual :rolleyes: ). |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:34 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com