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

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 07-17-2010, 09:40 PM   #51 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Studio City, CA, USA
Posts: 2
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
There is a down loadable spreadsheet at http://www.lotuselan.net/forums/elan...ts-t18445.html that allows the user to model virtually any vehicle including IC engined vehicles, PHEVs, and EVs.

The spreadsheet is unlocked so if you do not like something, change it.

  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to msd1107 For This Useful Post:
MrMiata (11-16-2010)
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 11-11-2010, 08:35 AM   #52 (permalink)
Building the future! :-)
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: orlando
Posts: 177
Thanks: 2
Thanked 12 Times in 11 Posts
Just felt the need to say thank you for such an incredibly valuable tool!
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 10:27 PM   #53 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,735

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 3,508 Times in 2,195 Posts
Testify!
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2011, 08:59 AM   #54 (permalink)
I've Been AeroHauled
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Dayton
Posts: 28
Thanks: 10
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hello,

You seem to be the expert on all this stuff. Any aero engineers on this site? What is the optimum streamline tear drop shape? I've seen mentions of 2.3:1, 3:1 in an aero book, and 2.7:1 calculated from diagrams? I would think the optimum shape would depend on speed, but have not found any reference to that.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2011, 05:17 PM   #55 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 11,487
Thanks: 18,493
Thanked 6,031 Times in 3,681 Posts
'optimum'

Quote:
Originally Posted by minAirForce View Post
Hello,

You seem to be the expert on all this stuff. Any aero engineers on this site? What is the optimum streamline tear drop shape? I've seen mentions of 2.3:1, 3:1 in an aero book, and 2.7:1 calculated from diagrams? I would think the optimum shape would depend on speed, but have not found any reference to that.
mini,I settled on 2.5:1 as the 'ideal.' Hucho demonstrates it at least 4-times in his book.It is the 'shortest' structure ( body-of-revolution ) with Cd 0.04.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
In free-air,2.1 has the same Cd,but in ground-effect its aft-body down-slope exceeds 22-degrees,which was shown By W.A.Mair to be the absolute maximum body camber angle which can support attached flow for a bluff body in ground effect.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the body is lengthened beyond 2.5:1,surface area grows,increasing skin-friction,so overall drag begins to rise.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
When the 2.5:1 teardrop is lowered into ground-reflection it creates a vehicle 'Template' which produces a vehicle of Cd 0.08 body drag ( w/o wheels ) which has a length,5X its height,including its ground clearance.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
For road vehicles,the drag coefficient is constant above 20-mph,so the Cd is basically fixed and is not affected by speed.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to aerohead For This Useful Post:
landsailor (05-21-2011)
Old 05-25-2011, 08:28 AM   #56 (permalink)
I've Been AeroHauled
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Dayton
Posts: 28
Thanks: 10
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks! Not quite following that. Can you post the references you mention - Hucho and Mair. I haven't been able to find any of Hucho or Mair's papers online.

My background has all been aerodynamics on airplanes. I'm trying to design the best aeroshell for a pu-truck. I'm thinking the 2.5:1 teardrop would not apply since the windshield has already deflected the air upward by the time it hits the shell and the 12-15 degree back sloping shell might be too steep if the airflow has already started to separate.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2011, 05:41 PM   #57 (permalink)
Burning oil to move air.
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Valencia (Europe)
Posts: 126

ausiasmobil - '06 Seat Leon 1.9 TDI Reference
90 day: 40.22 mpg (US)

EcoTxec - '99 Skoda Octavia 1.9 TDI 110 cv Laurin & Klement
90 day: 52.85 mpg (US)
Thanks: 92
Thanked 37 Times in 25 Posts
very useful tools
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2012, 06:44 PM   #58 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Chile
Posts: 222

Mercedes 89 D - '89 Mercedes 300 E
90 day: 33.86 mpg (US)

Skodie - '09 Skoda Octavia TDI PD
90 day: 38.84 mpg (US)

1993 Mercedes 300D Turbo - '93 Mercedes Benz 300D Turbo W124
90 day: 26.19 mpg (US)

Crossie - '16 Subaru XV Crosstreak
90 day: 9.61 mpg (US)

Crossie - '16 Subaru XV Crosstreak
90 day: 33.34 mpg (US)
Thanks: 15
Thanked 9 Times in 7 Posts
On-line aero calculator: good, but ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by MetroMPG View Post
Aerodynamic & rolling resistance calculator - EcoModder.com

Back in the day, krousdb made a spreadsheet to calculate aero & rolling resistance forces against his del Sol, their respective power requirements, and effect on fuel consumption at various speeds.

I've ported/expanded the spreadsheet into an online tool which asks you to enter or accept default values for...
- vehicle weight
- Crr (coefficient of rolling resistance - .008 represents a low rolling resistance tire on a smooth surface - see Wikipedia for other sample values)
- Cd
- Frontal Area
- Fuel energy density (in Watt hours / US gallon)
- Engine efficiency
- Air density (rho)
... and it spits out a table showing resistance force values, estimated power requirements and fuel consumption across a range of speeds.

It's online at EM here: Aerodynamic & rolling resistance calculator - EcoModder.com

It's not perfect (e.g. engine efficiency changes with load in real life, but remains fixed at the value you supply for all speeds in the calculations for fuel consumption).

Discussion, questions, suggestions welcome.
Excellent work! However, who knows what is the frontal area of a car? As it is important, car makers should give that measure to the owners. Maybe someone knows a link where to look for this variable?
__________________
Mercedes 300 D turbo 1993
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2012, 09:17 PM   #59 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 588

Ladogaboy - '11 Mitsubishi Lancer EVO GSR
Team Emperor
90 day: 27.64 mpg (US)

E85 EVO - '11 Mitsubishi Lancer EVO GSR
90 day: 21.38 mpg (US)
Thanks: 59
Thanked 59 Times in 47 Posts
You usually have to just calculate it yourself with a measuring tape.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2012, 09:40 AM   #60 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Chile
Posts: 222

Mercedes 89 D - '89 Mercedes 300 E
90 day: 33.86 mpg (US)

Skodie - '09 Skoda Octavia TDI PD
90 day: 38.84 mpg (US)

1993 Mercedes 300D Turbo - '93 Mercedes Benz 300D Turbo W124
90 day: 26.19 mpg (US)

Crossie - '16 Subaru XV Crosstreak
90 day: 9.61 mpg (US)

Crossie - '16 Subaru XV Crosstreak
90 day: 33.34 mpg (US)
Thanks: 15
Thanked 9 Times in 7 Posts
Yes, one can write a sketch, take measures and make an estimation.

Anyway, there is some links to tables at the bottom of the page, where there is the table. I tried it up with some precise measures and some very approximated others, and the results are VERY illustrative.

At 120 miles/h my car spend 47 HP of which about 40 are to overcome air resistance and only 7 correspond to rolling resistance. The table shows progression over all speeds.

Now I understand why people devote so much effort to aero mods. Even the manufacturers spend a lot on design to producing better aero cars.

Again, one of the most interesting and valuable contribution to the subject.

Thank you very much !

__________________
Mercedes 300 D turbo 1993
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CdA list Daox Aerodynamics 170 08-07-2020 04:22 PM
Top 5 most fuel efficient tires (Lowest Rolling resistance: LRR) blackjackel General Efficiency Discussion 144 01-25-2016 11:39 PM
Calculating Rolling Resistance SVOboy EcoModding Central 2 02-15-2012 08:43 PM
Sources of Aerodynamic Drag in Automobiles and Possible Solutions SVOboy Aerodynamics 12 02-17-2010 02:09 PM



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