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

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 07-06-2013, 07:59 PM   #1 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 23

Old Blue - '99 Nissan Frontier XE
90 day: 27.39 mpg (US)

Sube2 - '12 Subaru Legacy
90 day: 25.56 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4
Thanked 5 Times in 3 Posts
vortex generators in front of rear wheels

Another VG data point to throw into the mix....
I tried Vortex Generators in front of my rear wheels and attempted my first ABA testing (Actually BABA). Found a flat stretch of road, 54 mph using cruise control (never shut the car off so it was the same each time), no AC, relatively calm but humid out. Couldn't help but have a few cars passing me going the other way. I don't know where other folks live, but it's hard to find a good testing spot around here.
Anyhow, these are the numbers:

With VG's
North: 29.8, 30.9, 29.4, 29.6
South: 31, 30.4, 29.9

W/o VG's
North: 30, 29.6
South: 30.7, 30.5, 30

I don't see much difference.
Has anyone got data for VG's in front of rear wheels?

Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	PICT0003.JPG
Views:	275
Size:	42.5 KB
ID:	13393  
  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 07-07-2013, 12:49 AM   #2 (permalink)
Sport Compact Driver
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Lolo Mt
Posts: 623

Celica Gts - '84 Toyota Celica Gts
Sports Cars
90 day: 26.32 mpg (US)

The Bee - '96 Mazda B4000 4x4 Base
Pickups
90 day: 20.39 mpg (US)
Thanks: 56
Thanked 62 Times in 55 Posts
So I averaged out your data points
30.179 with vg's
30.1 wo

There are not enough data points to get a real feel for the advantages/disadvantages.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2013, 08:33 AM   #3 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Lithuania
Posts: 35
Thanks: 15
Thanked 45 Times in 12 Posts
usually vg's make very little difference on cars thus it's hard to see a difference in mpg. And I doubt that putting them in front of a wheel is a good idea. Covering the wheel arches or adding some flow deflectors would give a better result. I would try tuft testing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2013, 01:36 PM   #4 (permalink)
Aero Deshi
 
ChazInMT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Vero Beach, FL
Posts: 1,065

MagMetalCivic - '04 Honda Civic Sedan EX
Last 3: 34.25 mpg (US)
Thanks: 430
Thanked 669 Times in 358 Posts
As I keep trying to point out when I see VG Gimmicks discussed, Skin drag is not the enemy of fuel efficiency with vehicles, it is pressure/form drag that we must address.

By messing with air only an inch or so away from the skin of the car, air which is already decidedly non-laminar...meaning it is already vortexing...these devices accomplish nothing.

If you want to improve your cars aerodynamics, you need to make changes in the shape of the car, this will affect the pressure, hopefully reducing drag.

Buffeting the buffeted air 1" from the skin of a car which is creating effects on the air many feet out from the skin in every direction is like wondering why the flow of a 6 foot deep river isn't changed by more than a tiny fraction if there is a stony bottom or a smooth one.

When you look at VG's in the big picture, they're a joke. You will never gain a discernible change in fuel efficiency with VG's alone.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2013, 07:19 PM   #5 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
euromodder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Belgium
Posts: 4,683

The SCUD - '15 Fiat Scudo L2
Thanks: 178
Thanked 652 Times in 516 Posts
In that position, I'm not too sure what the VGs would or could accomplish.

Creating an air blanket over the wheel well is a bit too ambitious, I'm afraid
A cover for the wheel arches would have more effect.
__________________
Strayed to the Dark Diesel Side

  Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2013, 07:20 PM   #6 (permalink)
Not Doug
 
Xist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Show Low, AZ
Posts: 12,241

Chorizo - '00 Honda Civic HX, baby! :D
90 day: 35.35 mpg (US)

Mid-Life Crisis Fighter - '99 Honda Accord LX
90 day: 34.2 mpg (US)

Gramps - '04 Toyota Camry LE
90 day: 35.39 mpg (US)

Don't hit me bro - '05 Toyota Camry LE
90 day: 30.49 mpg (US)
Thanks: 7,254
Thanked 2,234 Times in 1,724 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChazInMT View Post
When you look at VG's in the big picture, they're a joke. You will never gain a discernible change in fuel efficiency with VG's alone.
We need to sic MythBusters on them!
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2013, 08:01 PM   #7 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
sendler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Syracuse, NY USA
Posts: 2,935

Honda CBR250R FI Single - '11 Honda CBR250R
90 day: 105.14 mpg (US)

2001 Honda Insight stick - '01 Honda Insight manual
90 day: 60.68 mpg (US)

2009 Honda Fit auto - '09 Honda Fit Auto
90 day: 38.51 mpg (US)

PCX153 - '13 Honda PCX150
90 day: 104.48 mpg (US)

2015 Yamaha R3 - '15 Yamaha R3
90 day: 80.94 mpg (US)

Ninja650 - '19 Kawasaki Ninja 650
90 day: 72.57 mpg (US)
Thanks: 326
Thanked 1,315 Times in 968 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffD View Post
VG's in front of rear wheels?
The vortex generators may be too close to the wheel openings to set up a good stream along the panel before it disappears. try moving them forward a foot.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2013, 08:56 PM   #8 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

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: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
I'd try moving them back about 5 feet.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2013, 10:33 PM   #9 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 23

Old Blue - '99 Nissan Frontier XE
90 day: 27.39 mpg (US)

Sube2 - '12 Subaru Legacy
90 day: 25.56 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4
Thanked 5 Times in 3 Posts
Should have known I was in for it . The idea was to add a bit of turbulence to the BL to get past the wheel well without flow separation. Thought it was worth a try. At least give me style points for using painters tape that matches my truck so well .

Maybe it'd work better if I was going as fast as a jet instead of 55? Anyhow, just a data point in case anyone else was considering it.

Closing off the arch would be better, but not sure I'm that ambitious.

CitroX: I am curious to understand what you mean by flow deflectors. Something like spats?
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2013, 06:09 AM   #10 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
euromodder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Belgium
Posts: 4,683

The SCUD - '15 Fiat Scudo L2
Thanks: 178
Thanked 652 Times in 516 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffD View Post
Should have known I was in for it . The idea was to add a bit of turbulence to the BL to get past the wheel well without flow separation.
The wheel well is a very high turbulence area - bad aerodynamics and a spinning wheel ...
VGs will have a tough time fighting all that existing turbulence.

It wouldn't be easy to design and position VGs to blanket the wheel well.
If it's possible at all ...

Quote:
Maybe it'd work better if I was going as fast as a jet instead of 55?
On aircraft, VGs are used to keep the airflow on the wing / fuselage.
In front of a wheel arch ... there's nothing much to keep the air onto.


Did you decide on the truck's color to match the tape ?
That's dedication

__________________
Strayed to the Dark Diesel Side

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread






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