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

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 04-17-2008, 12:40 AM   #21 (permalink)
MechE
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 1,151

The Miata - '01 Mazda MX-5 Miata
Thanks: 0
Thanked 21 Times in 18 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Compaq888 View Post
That was the most effective shape possible on a $20 budget...Yes I could of done a lot more and could of had something better but that would require a lot of money. You got to draw the line of how much spending to get better FE you're going to do...
No worries I'm totally in the same boat (plus making sure nothing is permanent)

__________________
Cars have not created a new problem. They merely made more urgent the necessity to solve existing ones.
  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 04-17-2008, 03:06 AM   #22 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: southern cali
Posts: 159

DMC - '99 Honda Civic DX
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by trebuchet03 View Post
No worries I'm totally in the same boat (plus making sure nothing is permanent)

Yea..that's what I did...all my aero mods were designed where I could take them off and nobody would notice a thing...and that's exactly what I did. I took them all off and sold the car.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2008, 11:25 AM   #23 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 11,655
Thanks: 18,733
Thanked 6,069 Times in 3,714 Posts
Diffuser angle

Hi Fabrio, in Hucho's book,there is a section on bellypans.Within this section is a piece on diffusers,which maximize the performance of the bellypan.I do not have the book in front of me,however,if my memory serves me,the article claims that a diffuser should have an angle of divergence of no more than 2 to 2.5 degrees,with respect to the horizontal plane or you'll be looking at separated flow.The work presumes that you have a complete bellypan ahead of the diffuser.The angles must be established with "load" in the car,so as to mimic the cars attitude,as it will demonstrate while driving with occupants and cargo.Sandbags,sacks of concrete mix,etc.,can be used to ballast the car's interior,to simulate the "load" while you set up the diffuser's angle.
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2008, 04:03 PM   #24 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
fabrio.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Italy, Morbegno (SO)
Posts: 151

tigra AERO - '96 opel tigra
Thanks: 9
Thanked 38 Times in 18 Posts
thankyou aerohead, the image come from Hucho's book, and I have supposed the same consideration, but I do not understand because full belly pannelled cars (loremo, ecc...) they have an angle divergence mote than 5 degrees.
Its possible, conseguence from hi grounf clearance of this cars?
__________________
.................................................. ...................

  Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2010, 03:10 PM   #25 (permalink)
aero guerrilla
 
Piwoslaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 3,541

Svietlana II - '13 Peugeot 308SW e-HDI 6sp
90 day: 58.1 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,056
Thanked 630 Times in 396 Posts
I found this in Piechna's book. It's based on Kohri and Numata's paper[1].



As can be seen, a diffuser hurts aerodynamic drag in vehicles with a square rear (vans, station wagons). It's something about the diffuser causing eddies that cancel with countereddies from the sloped rear end. In the square rear there are no countereddies, so there is no cancellation.

[1] Kohri I., Numata N., Effects of rear end configuration of vehicles on aerodynamic drag, JSAE Review, December 1985.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	diffuser.jpg
Views:	1913
Size:	79.8 KB
ID:	5854  
__________________
e·co·mod·ding: the art of turning vehicles into what they should be

What matters is where you're going, not how fast.

"... we humans tend to screw up everything that's good enough as it is...or everything that we're attracted to, we love to go and defile it." - Chris Cornell

Piwoslaw's Peugeot 307sw modding thread


Last edited by Piwoslaw; 03-26-2010 at 03:44 PM..
  Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Piwoslaw For This Useful Post:
donee (03-28-2010), geeteethree (03-26-2010), TOOQIKK (02-01-2011), UltArc (11-11-2014)
Old 03-26-2010, 05:49 PM   #26 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 11,655
Thanks: 18,733
Thanked 6,069 Times in 3,714 Posts
angle determined by origin of diffuser

Quote:
Originally Posted by fabrio. View Post
I am confused from two image below, can you help me to understand wich is the reality?



From the diagram,if the diffuser begins ahead of the rear suspension,go with 2-1/2-degrees maximum.
If it begins behind the rear axle go with 4-degrees maximum.
The 7-degree recommendation may be a compromise to road clearance and not really about aerodynamics.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2010, 10:11 PM   #27 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
puddleglum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Red Deer, AB
Posts: 421

Rondo - '07 Kia Rondo EX
Last 3: 20.47 mpg (US)

Tinkertoy2 - '00 Toyota Echo base
Team Toyota
Last 3: 46.03 mpg (US)
Thanks: 39
Thanked 95 Times in 69 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piwoslaw View Post
I found this in Piechna's book. It's based on Kohri and Numata's paper[1].



As can be seen, a diffuser hurts aerodynamic drag in vehicles with a square rear (vans, station wagons). It's something about the diffuser causing eddies that cancel with countereddies from the sloped rear end. In the square rear there are no countereddies, so there is no cancellation.

[1] Kohri I., Numata N., Effects of rear end configuration of vehicles on aerodynamic drag, JSAE Review, December 1985.
I was looking at this thread again to determine which angle to use for the rear pan/diffuser and this picture really confused me. Is the graph at the bottom showing drag or lift?
Piwoslaw is saying drag, but the numbers on the left correspond to the lift graph in the other diagram. Could one of you who really understand this please explain. If this is showing drag, is a rear pan going to do more harm than good on a bluff back car? If this is showing lift, is it saying that lift is increased or decreased on a bluff back car?
__________________



Almost all my driving is done 1-5 miles at a time.
Best short trip: 2.4 l/100 km, 3.9 km
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2010, 01:54 AM   #28 (permalink)
aero guerrilla
 
Piwoslaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 3,541

Svietlana II - '13 Peugeot 308SW e-HDI 6sp
90 day: 58.1 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,056
Thanked 630 Times in 396 Posts
Puddleglum, I would also like someone to comment on this, since I like to have more than one source of info.

I checked once more to make sure, and that chart is for drag (Cx), not lift (Cz). As mentioned, for sedan and sloped-back (notchback and fastback) cars, the sloped C pillars cause a pair of eddies (I posted a scan of them somewhere, but can't find it now), while the diffuser produces counterrotating eddies that cancel. The angle of the diffuser determines how strong the countereddies are, and at about 3°-4° is the minimum, after which the diffuser's countereddies are strong enough to survive cancellation and bring drag down again. In a squareback car there is no sloped C pillar to produce eddies, so the diffuser's eddies have nothing to cancel with, and their drag increases more of less proportionally to the angle.

I'll update this later today when I scan another drawing.

I the mean time, here's a related thread:
Underbody panel testing

EDIT: Here are the promised drawings:

On the left is a sloped-back or notch-back vehicle (notice cancellation of eddies and countereddies), on the right a square-back vehicle (no countereddies to cancel).


Wakes (and eddies) from different vehicle shapes.


Drag (Cx) and lift (Cz) change with diffuser angle. This is from a chapter on race and performance cars, so I don't know how close it is for non-race vehicles. Based on:
Bearman P.W., De Beer D., Hamidy E., Harvey J.K., The effect of a moving Floor on Wind-Tunnel Simulation of Road Vehicles, SAE 880245.


Drag (Cx) and lift (Cz) of different downforce devices:
1 - Spoiler,
2 - Rear diffuser,
3 - Diffuser plus front air dam.
__________________
e·co·mod·ding: the art of turning vehicles into what they should be

What matters is where you're going, not how fast.

"... we humans tend to screw up everything that's good enough as it is...or everything that we're attracted to, we love to go and defile it." - Chris Cornell

Piwoslaw's Peugeot 307sw modding thread


Last edited by Piwoslaw; 05-15-2010 at 04:07 PM.. Reason: Drawings added
  Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Piwoslaw For This Useful Post:
puddleglum (05-16-2010), RobertSmalls (05-16-2010), TOOQIKK (02-01-2011)
Old 05-16-2010, 01:20 AM   #29 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
puddleglum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Red Deer, AB
Posts: 421

Rondo - '07 Kia Rondo EX
Last 3: 20.47 mpg (US)

Tinkertoy2 - '00 Toyota Echo base
Team Toyota
Last 3: 46.03 mpg (US)
Thanks: 39
Thanked 95 Times in 69 Posts
I see what you are saying, but your first diagram seems to show that a rear pan is useless on a bluff back car. The middle graph on this last post seems to still show a slight improvement. I hope that one of the experts will give some clarification on this. It doesn't make sense to me that there would not be any benefit to smoothing the underbody, even on a hatchback
__________________



Almost all my driving is done 1-5 miles at a time.
Best short trip: 2.4 l/100 km, 3.9 km
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2010, 02:16 AM   #30 (permalink)
aero guerrilla
 
Piwoslaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 3,541

Svietlana II - '13 Peugeot 308SW e-HDI 6sp
90 day: 58.1 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,056
Thanked 630 Times in 396 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by puddleglum View Post
I see what you are saying, but your first diagram seems to show that a rear pan is useless on a bluff back car. The middle graph on this last post seems to still show a slight improvement.
I think those two graphs are based on different papers, so maybe the researchers used different vehicles? Anyway, I'd like to know what Hucho has to say about it, and I'd be honored if Phil dropped a comment.

One thing makes me wonder: my car is a square-backed station wagon, but it now has a Kamm-style roof extension, so can it still be regarded as "bluff"? In such a case, would a rear diffuser help more than if I didn't have the Kammy?

__________________
e·co·mod·ding: the art of turning vehicles into what they should be

What matters is where you're going, not how fast.

"... we humans tend to screw up everything that's good enough as it is...or everything that we're attracted to, we love to go and defile it." - Chris Cornell

Piwoslaw's Peugeot 307sw modding thread

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How to decide whether to remove rear spoiler to decrease drag, improve mileage MetroMPG Aerodynamics 130 02-10-2015 08:50 PM
Video: tuft testing (rear) 1993 Ford Mustang notchback MetroMPG Aerodynamics 12 02-05-2011 09:40 AM
Done: A-B-A test on rear wheel skirts - Corolla, Camry Hybrid MetroMPG Aerodynamics 11 06-06-2009 03:49 PM
tigra AERO PROJECT rear end question fabrio. Aerodynamics 19 03-31-2008 12:01 PM
Rear window fairing (roof extension) apgrok1 Aerodynamics 14 03-12-2008 12:33 AM



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