EcoModder.com

EcoModder.com (https://ecomodder.com/forum/)
-   Success Stories (https://ecomodder.com/forum/success-stories.html)
-   -   Testing shows possible 5% increase in FE with a open-ended kammback on SUV (https://ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/testing-shows-possible-5-increase-fe-open-ended-36151.html)

mannydantyla 02-12-2018 04:31 PM

Testing shows possible 5% increase in FE with a open-ended kammback on SUV
 
I used AABBAA testing to probe any potential improvements to Fuel Economy from adding a kammback to my 1997 Jeep Cherokee. I'm going to share as many details, numbers, and observations as I can and so you can come up with your own conclusion.

Background info: I've started working on getting decent FE from my adventuremobile. One or two times a year, I go on long offroad roadtrips aka overlanding. Most of the miles are still on the highway though, and I'm tired of getting 17 mpg at 70mph. So I've started to make little improvements, and you can read about them on my build thread. Other eco improvements will include upgrades to the engine, reducing rolling resistance, and other aero mods like wheel spats, air dam, and belly pan.

http://dannix.net/sites/default/file...j/IMG_2905.jpg

Hypothesis

It's long been said that the big aero money is in shrinking the size of the wake that drags the vehicle back. On my big bluff body SUV, I've identified two or three ways this could be accomplished: boat tail, open boxed cavity, spoiler (not as likely but it's possible I guess).

We all know what a kammback is, but I'm fairly new here and from what I understand, a kammback is like a chopped boat tail.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...DP215_rear.JPG

And here's an open boxed cavity. If you've ever driven on the highway, you know what this is even if you don't know that you know..

http://www.stemco.com/qbin/1831.jpg

So, and I'm no expert, but it seems to me that if you combine a kammback and an open boxed cavity, you get what I call the open ended kammback and what others might call a fluid tail.

Another example of an open boxed cavity that also takes on a kammback shape:
http://www.curbsideclassic.com/wp-co...mage/28078.jpg

On last example. This is minivan that MetroMPG did: http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...-6-a-6069.html
http://ecomodder.com/imgs/montana-pa...boattail-1.jpg

^^^ MetroMPG found that he could get a 3.7% boost in FE with an open-ended kammback that is, frankly, larger then I would want permanently.

There was an even better illustration on aerohead's sabataged photobucket gallery, but this one is similar. It shows that, as a function of the length of the kammback over the width of the bluff body vehicle, the reduction in drag coefficient is significant starting at maybe 30% (that is, the kammback should be at least 2 feet long for a 6 foot wide vehicle). IIRC, aerohead's illustration was less optimistic.

http://ecomodder.com/forum/member-fr...1215134663.jpg

So based off that, my hypotheses is that I could possibly see a small to moderate boost in fuel efficiency with an open-ended kammback that's about one to two feet long.

Testing Procedure

Last Thursday I had the day off from work and it was a nice and warm (for February) day with not too much wind (for the midwest).

I identified the perfect road. We call it "old K10" because it used to be Kansas highway 10 but they built a new highway that runs parallel to it and that's where all the traffic is now, so this road is not only mostly traffic free but the speed limit is a nice 55 mph. And it's PERFECTLY FLAT because it's located on river bottom land. So it's surrounded by farms. And it's almost 4 miles long in the flat spot. And there's good spots to pull over at the start and end. Perfect!

Here's what I did: I drove to the start of the "test track" and that was several miles so I think that was enough to warm the vehicle up. Then I did two A runs (there and back), then two B runs with the kammback on, then two C runs with the kammback slightly adjusted to be more curvy, and then two A runs.

I used my new $20 obdii wifi dongle that I connect to a $5 iOS app to get my fuel consumption readings. It took some practice learning how to use it, and I found that the best way was to use the "economizer" feature of the app, and then snap a screenshot after the drive.

I started on the West end of the test track (I used a parking lot for a call center), drove the ~3.6 miles (it starts to get hilly after that), pull off onto a side road and take a snap shot of the obdii app, turn around and drive back and pull into the parking lot and take another screen shot.

I don't have cruise control, so I could not totally remove myself as the driver from the experiment. However I made sure to accelerate at 2k RPM and take my foot off the gas pedal at exactly the same spot. And I tried to keep it at exactly 55 mph, though I admit it did range from 53 to 57 mph.

The experiment

The first two A runs went smoothly. Then I parked in the parking lot and began cutting the cardboard and taping it to the back of the jeep. I had to work fast because I didn't want the car to cool down too much. If you don't think it's all that windy out, try taping a big piece of cardboard to the top of a vehicle and you'll think twice! That's about the time I realized that it was more windy then I originally thought, and it seemed to me that the wind was coming mostly from the South. I would say South South West.

I used "gaffer tape" and it worked really really well and didn't leave any residue on the car.

http://dannix.net/sites/default/file...j/IMG_2899.jpg

http://dannix.net/sites/default/file...j/IMG_2898.jpg

http://dannix.net/sites/default/file...j/IMG_2900.jpg

I tried to make it straight with a ~10% slope. I think I remember hearing somewhere that Wunibald Kamm said the slope of the roof shouldn't excede 10%.

Then I drove the course just as before. Maybe it was in my head but it did seem like the car was more "slippery" lol.

Back in the parking lot, cut up the corners of the cardboard a little so I could bend them and add a slight curve to it. In hindsight, it doesn't look like I did much to it. Also, when I went to remove it, the packaging tape I used to pull it down towards the rear window had loosed up on the window, so the curve was even less pronounced.

http://dannix.net/sites/default/file...j/IMG_2905.jpg

It addition to that, my obdii scan app crashed on the way back so I only got one run in. For this reason and the other one above, I'm all but throwing out this information.

Finally, I did two more A runs and then went home to add up the numbers.

Results

http://dannix.net/sites/default/file...D6041BA512.JPG

X1 is traveling East, and X2 is traveling West back to the start. A2 and A4 are longer then B2 because the app reset when turned around after B1. I just subracted the A1 numbers from A2 (and same for A4) to get the numbers here:

http://dannix.net/sites/default/file...j/IMG_2914.jpg

Analysis

So that's exactly 1 mpg better with the kammback on. Woo hoo!!

1/19.64 = 5.1% and I think that's pretty significant.

However, if you look closer at the numbers, a few things should jump out at you:
  • the mileage isn't exactly the same
  • The A3 run was by far the best, at 22.3 mph.

So why was the mileage not exactly the same? Well, when I turned around to head back West onto the side road, I kept having to drive a few yards further each time because of traffic. I think an elementary school got out around that time and parents where crawling that area to pick them up.

And why was the third A run the best?

I don't really have an answer for that one. If you look at the weather history for that day, the wind didn't shift but it did start to slow down around 3:30pm which is when I started the last to A runs.

Conclusions

The experiment wasn't perfect and is certainly not rigorous by any stretch of the imagination. I wish the road was longer, the wind didn't shift, I had cruise control, there was less traffic at my turnaround point, the app didn't crash during the second C run, etc.

But I'm fairly confident that making a permanent version of this out of sheet metal could get me around 1 mpg better then before, and possible even more at higher speeds. The open ended kammback is a go!

What do you think?

Xist 02-12-2018 04:45 PM

Nice work! I feel like I understand the term "Kammback" a bit differently than you, although I would definitely call what you made a Kammback. According to the wiki, it is a "Partial Kammback:" 65+ Vehicle modifications for better fuel economy - EcoModder.com

So, what is a full Kammback? Something far longer?

Daschicken 02-12-2018 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mannydantyla (Post 561230)

I identified the perfect road. We call it "old K10" because it used to be Kansas highway 10 but they built a new highway that runs parallel to it and that's where all the traffic is now, so this road is not only mostly traffic free but the speed limit is a nice 55 mph. And it's PERFECTLY FLAT because it's located on river bottom land. So it's surrounded by farms. And it's almost 4 miles long in the flat spot. And there's good spots to pull over at the start and end. Perfect!

Jealous!

Quote:

Originally Posted by mannydantyla (Post 561230)
But I'm fairly confident that making a permanent version of this out of sheet metal could get me around 1 mpg better then before, and possible even more at higher speeds. The open ended kammback is a go!

Due to the decapitation hazard for motorcyclists or anyone exposed should the rear of your vehicle come at them rapidly, I would advise against making it out of sheet metal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mannydantyla (Post 561230)
What do you think?

I think I miss the days when these kinds of modifications on this forum were common. Back when I first joined in 2012, every other thread was someone putting wheel skirts, wheel covers, or kammbacks on their cars. I also think you need to figure out how to smooth out those sharp edges in the final version.

elhigh 02-13-2018 09:58 AM

I think you could keep the costs pretty far down by doing your project in coroplast instead of metal. It'll be lighter too, and with a bit of clever construction will be just as rigid - important in your Kansas winds.

SUVs, especially older BOF SUVs like your XJ, are aero-terrible. All the aerodynamic work done to it was to keep the wind out of the driver's eyes at speed and that's all (which is to say, none - that's what the windshield is for). There are LOTS of aero mods you can do to make this thing less of a disaster.

Nice work. Looking forward to seeing where you go with it.

ALSO: can you take off the roof rails at all when you're not overlanding? If you don't need them and removing them won't open holes in the roof, that's worth doing. That's costing you too, and they're actually a surprising source of wind noise right up near your head.

ALSO ALSO: if you can, try to run some longer tanks for your mileage logs. Short fills don't give very accurate results.

Xist 02-13-2018 10:17 AM

You plan a "custom aerodynamic roof rack" Will you tell us more about that?

You can try fabulousing up boat tails for the posts. That should negate most of the aerodynamic penalty of having roof rails, although I am not sure how it would look. Perhaps you could shape foam to fill in the space between the rail and the roof and then boat-tail that.

How low does the factory air dam go? How much do you like the window deflectors?

mannydantyla 02-13-2018 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daschicken (Post 561256)
Due to the decapitation hazard for motorcyclists or anyone exposed should the rear of your vehicle come at them rapidly, I would advise against making it out of sheet metal.

Hmmm I didn't think about that. Yeah that would be a pretty gruesome scene. Has it ever happened before? I know that bikers crashing into the back of cars [happens far more often then the motorcycle crowd likes to admit, and youtube has the evidence as you can imagine. It's actually the number one way bikers crash according to a Virginia Tech study.

It's about 5' above the pavement, right at neck height for a tall male. And, depending on the type of bike, a motorcyclists ride height is usually a little lower to the ground then standing height, but higher then sitting in a car. But if the rear tire rams into the back bumper, especially if braking hard on the front wheel, it would catapult the rider upwards and forward, wouldn't it? They basically get launched onto the roof, from the many videos I've seen.

Maybe this will add a point to the notion that my kammback can only be a temporary one that is tapped onto the jeep right before taking off down the highway for road trips.

IMO if it's going to be permanent, it's gotta be steel and it's gotta either be welded on or riveted on. I could also weld on some threaded studs and carefully fasten a roll of sheet metal with a nut & washer onto said studs. Would be less permanent that way.

At the very least it would need a strip of soft rubber around the edge so that folks walking behind it don't cut their faces. Ouch.

Quote:

Originally Posted by elhigh (Post 561293)
ALSO: can you take off the roof rails at all when you're not overlanding? If you don't need them and removing them won't open holes in the roof, that's worth doing. That's costing you too, and they're actually a surprising source of wind noise right up near your head.

Yeah I was waiting for someone to say that, lol. I just built those things with my new welder, it was my first welding project, and they replaced the stock ones which had two crossbars. These are sans crossbars so I'm counting it as an aero mod :p

mannydantyla 02-13-2018 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xist (Post 561299)
You plan a "custom aerodynamic roof rack" Will you tell us more about that?

It's the one you see up there now. It's a little taller then I meant for it to be, but it doesn't have the crossbars like the stock one did.

I've actually had to use it once already. My pickup was full of debris to haul to the landfill (old kitchen cabinets; I'm doing a kitchen renovation right now) so when we were picking up some large boards for the new cabinets I had to use the jeep. For crossbars I simply zip tied some 2x4ers to the roof rails and it worked great.

http://dannix.net/sites/default/file...31744000_n.jpg

I decided that if it's wrong to have a jeep with a roof rack, then I don't want to be right.

This is your typical Jeep Cherokee roof rack (ok, it's a little more than typical, but you get the idea)

http://www.xxxpedition.com/2005-Alas...r/IMG_6078.JPG

So I think I'm a little ahead of the game, aero-wise, compared to that one above. I also don't carry as much stuff on my adventures, I just tent camp.

Last time, though, I thought it a good idea to put the spare tire on the roof. Horrible idea.

http://dannix.net/sites/default/file...?itok=Mp82ej8S

Next time I'll squeeze it into the cargo area or build a spare tire carrier on the rear bumper.

https://cdn.rubitrux.com/media/catal...-jeep-xj_1.jpg

mannydantyla 02-13-2018 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xist (Post 561299)
How low does the factory air dam go?

This far:

http://dannix.net/sites/default/file...?itok=ar67_ju7

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xist (Post 561299)
How much do you like the window deflectors?

They're nice to have because I don't have AC and they make it way more comfortable to have the windows open on the freeway. Worth the aero penalty.

Xist 02-13-2018 02:06 PM

Window deflectors versus air conditioning is an interesting situation.

mannydantyla 02-13-2018 02:37 PM

I'm going to delete the AC compressor from the engine accessories, move the alternator to it's place, and delete the mechanical fan and replace it with electric ones.

This should remove some parasitic drain from the engine. Right? It's a big engine - 4.0L inline-6. So it might not help as much as it would on a small engine but it can't hurt that's for sure.

http://dannix.net/sites/default/file...xj/xjbelts.png


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:27 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com