R/C Tech Forums

Go Back   R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Electric On-Road

Like Tree9Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-07-2017, 08:23 PM   #136
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 984
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 30Tooth View Post
No problem with it, just messing with you

Oh sorry I misunderstood you!

That's cool. And thank you for mentioning that shortening the cord length would help. I got my scissors ready to go, tomorrow.
davidl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2017, 09:05 AM   #137
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Beneath a rock down by the river. Don't have money for van
Posts: 2,899
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

If you can copy the bottom shape it would be better, see the straight section is the tail and not the leading edge? Also that it looks like a RC wing backwards? That's why I call RC wings air dams. If you need help just ask.
__________________
( ͡ ͜ʖ ͡)

Last edited by 30Tooth; 06-08-2017 at 09:25 AM.
30Tooth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2017, 12:02 PM   #138
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: San Jose CA
Posts: 174
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 30Tooth View Post
If you can copy the bottom shape it would be better, see the straight section is the tail and not the leading edge? Also that it looks like a RC wing backwards? That's why I call RC wings air dams. If you need help just ask.
Is this something that can be analyzed in Flowsquare? Coming from the RC sailplane hobby, a lot of effort was made to optimize airfoils for performance, and I often wondered about the impact and effectiveness of a true foil for RC cars. My gut feeling is that given the cord size and the Reynolds numbers associated, it would probably not be worth the effort to create and use true airfoiled wings for Touring Cars.

Interesting point about the PF Cadillac body, I too tried that body last weekend, and it was noticeably better than my old body. When I set the 2 bodies side by side, the profiles from the front wheels back were almost identical. The front fascias were slightly different, with the Caddy having a more vertical profile. When I get a chance, I'd like to compare the PF Caddy to one of the current top TC bodies available. Given the multiple rules and strict dimensions for TC bodies, I wonder if they are all very close in profile - pick a shape that works and tweak the appearance for a different product line.
belewis01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2017, 12:10 PM   #139
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 984
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 30Tooth View Post
If you can copy the bottom shape it would be better, see the straight section is the tail and not the leading edge? Also that it looks like a RC wing backwards? That's why I call RC wings air dams. If you need help just ask.

Little short story, my first introduction to a large, national level rc car race was the Winter Champs at Grand Rapids, MI in 1988. They had two classes, 1/12 scale stock and 1/12 scale modified. All the total best of the US were there to run, including Joel "Magic" Johnson, Cliff Lett, Tony Niesenger, and the list goes on and on. There was an I main in mod and a U main in stock for over 400 drivers.

I had been messing with some composite guys in indy that did Indy cars. They built the composite chassis for Longhorn Racing that Al Unser ran for one lap in the 1980 Indy 500. Well, they made me two wings with the cord you pictured from a small carbon fiber layup and I took them to Grand Rapids. I gave one to Chris Dosek to run in mod and he mounted it on his TOJ body, including cutting out all of the back of that body to remove any upward lip and make room for this wing. He qualified second behind Mike Blackstock and finished second behind Joel Johnson. It was by far the best Corally chassis on the track that weekend.
davidl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2017, 04:12 PM   #140
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Beneath a rock down by the river. Don't have money for van
Posts: 2,899
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by belewis01 View Post
Is this something that can be analyzed in Flowsquare? Coming from the RC sailplane hobby, a lot of effort was made to optimize airfoils for performance, and I often wondered about the impact and effectiveness of a true foil for RC cars. My gut feeling is that given the cord size and the Reynolds numbers associated, it would probably not be worth the effort to create and use true airfoiled wings for Touring Cars.

Interesting point about the PF Cadillac body, I too tried that body last weekend, and it was noticeably better than my old body. When I set the 2 bodies side by side, the profiles from the front wheels back were almost identical. The front fascias were slightly different, with the Caddy having a more vertical profile. When I get a chance, I'd like to compare the PF Caddy to one of the current top TC bodies available. Given the multiple rules and strict dimensions for TC bodies, I wonder if they are all very close in profile - pick a shape that works and tweak the appearance for a different product line.
I agree with you, no sense in trying to perfect an airfoil because of how small they are, maybe if we pursue double deck wings we could get some good numbers... Getting the shape moderately right is enough, there's more to tackle like size, AoA and placement.
It's not that the dimensions are strict, just that it could be better understood. A smooth flowing body will have better flow (I mean the advantage of directing air flow to where we want) that one that is aggressive, like the current TC bodies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by davidl View Post
Little short story, my first introduction to a large, national level rc car race was the Winter Champs at Grand Rapids, MI in 1988. They had two classes, 1/12 scale stock and 1/12 scale modified. All the total best of the US were there to run, including Joel "Magic" Johnson, Cliff Lett, Tony Niesenger, and the list goes on and on. There was an I main in mod and a U main in stock for over 400 drivers.

I had been messing with some composite guys in indy that did Indy cars. They built the composite chassis for Longhorn Racing that Al Unser ran for one lap in the 1980 Indy 500. Well, they made me two wings with the cord you pictured from a small carbon fiber layup and I took them to Grand Rapids. I gave one to Chris Dosek to run in mod and he mounted it on his TOJ body, including cutting out all of the back of that body to remove any upward lip and make room for this wing. He qualified second behind Mike Blackstock and finished second behind Joel Johnson. It was by far the best Corally chassis on the track that weekend.
That's very cool! I will try making one with my 3d printer
__________________
( ͡ ͜ʖ ͡)
30Tooth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2017, 02:52 PM   #141
Tech Initiate
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 34
Send a message via ICQ to iliveonnitro Send a message via AIM to iliveonnitro Send a message via Yahoo to iliveonnitro
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 30Tooth View Post
Just a sec while I upload some software runs so you can compare with previous ones.

VS

About the Ascari I didn't buy one unfortunately, if you please could take some pics so I can see the whole body that would be super.





The splitter is regulated, no more than 10mm and that looks enormous. About the canards seem small, other than that no noticeable features.

@J. Filipow, looks great! If I could design something it would be front and rear diffusers and rear wings.
Does the rear of the car not go turbulent? I would expect, especially on a straight, the air would be turbulent behind the car. I'm guessing the software you have isn't that complicated, though.

This would be where most of the gains could be made (i'll post on that in a minute).
iliveonnitro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2017, 03:07 PM   #142
Tech Initiate
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 34
Send a message via ICQ to iliveonnitro Send a message via AIM to iliveonnitro Send a message via Yahoo to iliveonnitro
Default

Mechanical engineer here, so this area is one of my interests.

Drag typically increases when flow goes from laminar to turbulent (granted, there are ways to make turbulent flow cause less drag, but that's not often the case with automotive speeds). I would think, at this scale and speed, turbulent air behind and under the car would be the biggest source of improvement for aerodynamics.

This is why, eg, a sedan has better fuel economy than the exact same version of the car made into a hatchback. If you ran the hatchback in reverse, you'd often reduce the coefficient of drag.

For example, a teardrop has better aerodynamics when the rounded end is facing the wind and worse drag when the pointed end is facing the wind.





Image behind an SUV (too large to attach in this thread): https://i.stack.imgur.com/zAYgb.jpg

Here's a decent video from MIT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKH1DyV9vNU

or this article: Aerodynamics - Introduction to the science of air flow

I would think that finding a way to round off the back into more of an airfoil shape would be best. Also, remove any mirrors if your car has them and make sure the wheels are smooth. The lowest frontal area is also important.
davidl likes this.
iliveonnitro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2017, 04:56 PM   #143
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Beneath a rock down by the river. Don't have money for van
Posts: 2,899
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by iliveonnitro View Post
Does the rear of the car not go turbulent? I would expect, especially on a straight, the air would be turbulent behind the car. I'm guessing the software you have isn't that complicated, though.

This would be where most of the gains could be made (i'll post on that in a minute).
I think it does, been thinking about it because the SW possibly only sees that in a 2d way, meaning the airflow on the sides doesn't exist. But take a look at this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fco87iQHilY

Quote:
Originally Posted by iliveonnitro View Post
Mechanical engineer here, so this area is one of my interests.

Drag typically increases when flow goes from laminar to turbulent (granted, there are ways to make turbulent flow cause less drag, but that's not often the case with automotive speeds). I would think, at this scale and speed, turbulent air behind and under the car would be the biggest source of improvement for aerodynamics.

This is why, eg, a sedan has better fuel economy than the exact same version of the car made into a hatchback. If you ran the hatchback in reverse, you'd often reduce the coefficient of drag.

For example, a teardrop has better aerodynamics when the rounded end is facing the wind and worse drag when the pointed end is facing the wind.





Image behind an SUV (too large to attach in this thread): https://i.stack.imgur.com/zAYgb.jpg

Here's a decent video from MIT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKH1DyV9vNU

or this article: Aerodynamics - Introduction to the science of air flow

I would think that finding a way to round off the back into more of an airfoil shape would be best. Also, remove any mirrors if your car has them and make sure the wheels are smooth. The lowest frontal area is also important.
Thanks for your input!
Here mine from what I've been learning:
1- teardrop shapes are indeed the best! One with a Kamm tail is what I seem to aim for, unknowingly. Same about frontal area.
2- the rear wheels should be tucked in more than the front ones. I never thought that, current RC bodyshells are opposite of that.
3- rear wing AoA are too extreme and ill designed.
4- sharp edges blocking airflow on the body and underside.

Tackling those challenges isn't difficult but for me it's time consuming testing one change in the front and hoping it doesn't create havoc in the rear...

For example I'm "stuck" at the front splitter design, I have more validation now from the links and pics you posted, should unlock more potential.

BTW, while I have your attention I want to ask you something. Do vortexes have more drag than turbulent air? Speaking of canard induced and boot corner vortexes.
__________________
( ͡ ͜ʖ ͡)
30Tooth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2017, 01:55 PM   #144
Tech Master
 
wtcc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,227
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

My recommendation would be to design a body without a front splitter. The splitter should be part of the undertray. Like this the efficiency of the floor is increased and you don't have to think of a way to close the gap between splitter and floor/bumper...
__________________
/// CAUTION: Rogue robot \\\
wtcc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2017, 02:32 PM   #145
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Beneath a rock down by the river. Don't have money for van
Posts: 2,899
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wtcc View Post
My recommendation would be to design a body without a front splitter. The splitter should be part of the undertray. Like this the efficiency of the floor is increased and you don't have to think of a way to close the gap between splitter and floor/bumper...
Almost there! I though about doing a 3d printed front bumper lower support like the pic. A proper diffuser. Way easier than a tray, what you reckon?
Attached Thumbnails
Little aero secrets-alpha-version.jpg  
Nerobro likes this.
__________________
( ͡ ͜ʖ ͡)

Last edited by 30Tooth; 06-13-2017 at 03:29 PM.
30Tooth is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Silver Can Motor Tips/Tricks TAMIYAMANUK Electric On-Road 1741 04-11-2014 01:44 PM
Looking for 1/10 Electric Racers on the New Asphalt at Mikes, Houston John Stranahan Texas Racing 495 10-08-2010 03:55 PM
Tamiya Asia Cup Qualifying Series 2006 CheeYong Malaysian R/C Racers 768 09-20-2006 12:29 AM


Tags
aero, aerodynamic, aerodynamics


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. It is currently 01:07 AM.


Powered By: vBulletin v3.9.2.1
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Advertise Content © 2001-2011 RCTech.net