28.06.2014 Views

Racecar Engineering - November 2005

Racecar Engineering - November 2005

Racecar Engineering - November 2005

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Aero tips<br />

But, as Carroll Smith also pointed out, it’s not<br />

just the drag of the fastener themselves that<br />

matters, but the wakes extending rearwards from<br />

them. Just think about the shape of a wake you<br />

can see easily, such as that from a boat moving<br />

through water. Depending on the exact<br />

circumstances, the wake spreads out downstream<br />

and potentially affects the flow to other parts of<br />

the racecar, as well as causing drag and local flow<br />

separation. So to really offend an aerodynamicist,<br />

just attach your Gurney to the underside of your<br />

wing and use hex headed bolts to hold the thing in<br />

place! If you do use nuts and bolts to hold a<br />

Gurney on, at least use the dome-headed type<br />

(wing trailing edges are generally too thin for<br />

countersunk or flush fasteners) with the heads on<br />

the underside, and the more obtrusive nut and<br />

bolt shank on the upper surface where they sit<br />

ahead of the vertical portion of the Gurney and<br />

have minimal influence.<br />

Moving on to protruding edges, borrowing<br />

once more from Carroll Smith and Tune to Win.<br />

Figure 5 shows the drag coefficients of various<br />

sheet metal joints, and again the conclusions are<br />

pretty obvious. Yet the occurrence of forward<br />

facing edge overlaps is all too frequent, especially<br />

so on the flat aluminium sheets used to panel in<br />

the underside of racecars. Panelling in the<br />

underside is aerodynamically a good thing to do<br />

(providing cooling has also been carefully<br />

considered), but leaving forward facing<br />

protruding edges clearly negates some of the<br />

effort. The designs in figure 5 point at the most<br />

aerodynamically efficient ways of joining such<br />

panels, and the small amount of extra effort will<br />

surely be worthwhile.<br />

There’s a tale told of a well-known racecar<br />

C D<br />

= 0.70<br />

C D<br />

= 0.70<br />

C D<br />

= 0.5<br />

Velocity<br />

Boundary layer thickness = .307 inches<br />

.275”<br />

–5°<br />

–1° –7°<br />

–2°<br />

–10° +5°<br />

.190”<br />

.22”<br />

.22”<br />

manufacturer’s managing director who had the<br />

habit of running his thumbnail across the joins in<br />

bodywork after initial assembly to ensure they<br />

were as tight fitting and smooth as possible – not<br />

very scientific perhaps, but a valid inspection<br />

technique nevertheless. And you can see his<br />

reasoning – with all the effort put into CFD and<br />

wind tunnel development programmes, it was<br />

vital that there were no major tolerance problems<br />

on the finished product. But a good fit between<br />

body panels is vital whether or not you’ve<br />

Relative surface drag<br />

1.39<br />

1.20<br />

1.00<br />

1.62<br />

1.17<br />

1.28<br />

6.66<br />

h<br />

V<br />

h = 1 / 2<br />

b<br />

V<br />

h = b<br />

Figure 6: relative drag<br />

caused by different<br />

shaped gaps in panels<br />

Figure 7: thin tape over<br />

gaps in bodywork can<br />

help reduce drag<br />

Below – figure 8: relative<br />

drag caused by scratches<br />

and ridges on bodywork<br />

Relative surface drag<br />

b<br />

b<br />

h<br />

1<br />

80<br />

C D<br />

= 0.11<br />

C D<br />

= –0.04<br />

C D<br />

= 0.13<br />

C D<br />

= 0.24<br />

C D<br />

= 0.01<br />

C D<br />

= 0.24<br />

C D<br />

= 0.16<br />

C D<br />

= 0.07<br />

Figure 5: drag coefficients of all the major joint<br />

types between sheet metal bodywork sections<br />

“<br />

CERTAIN GAP SHAPES<br />

CREATE APPALLING<br />

DRAG<br />

”<br />

developed your car on a computer or in a wind<br />

tunnel. Figure 6 once again appears in Milliken<br />

and Milliken, and originates in that 1963 paper.<br />

Although this time the drag numbers are relative<br />

to the third example from the top, we can see<br />

from the second example from the bottom of<br />

figure 5 that if a simple, shallow gap creates<br />

significant drag, then it is probably fair to assume<br />

that wider and deeper gaps will be worse. And<br />

figure 6 tells us that certain gap shapes create<br />

appalling drag.<br />

An easy and frequently used way of improving<br />

V<br />

h = b<br />

130<br />

body fit at the track is to tape over the joins,<br />

preferably with very thin tape. This at least will be<br />

better than leaving large gaps. Similarly, where<br />

body cut outs have been made, to clear<br />

suspension legs for example, these can be taped<br />

over to bridge the gap (see photo figure 7). Body<br />

fasteners may beneficially be taped over, too.<br />

Scratches and ridges have also been examined<br />

to see their effect on skin friction drag, and figure<br />

8 illustrates, this also coming from that 1963 paper<br />

via Milliken and Milliken. Although actual<br />

dimensions are missing in this figure, we can at<br />

b<br />

h<br />

➔<br />

56 <strong>November</strong> <strong>2005</strong> <strong>Racecar</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong><br />

www.racecar-engineering.com

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!