Post on 12-Apr-2017
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
C O V E N T R Y U N I V E R S I T Y
M S C A U T O M O T I V E
E N G I N E E R I N G 2 0 1 4 - 1 5
This document contains the Wind Tunnel Test
results of the given Lynne Turner Model. A CFD
analysis using STAR CCM+ was conducted on the
model and a detail description of both the test
results has been illustrated in this report.
Imran S. Rajela – ( 5914621)
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
1 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................................. 6
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................................................................................... 7
2.1. BERNOULLI’S PRINCIPLE ....................................................................................................................................... 7
2.2. REYNOLDS NUMBER ................................................................................................................................................ 8
2.3. Mach number ............................................................................................................................................................... 8
2.4. DRAG & LIFT FORCES ............................................................................................................................................... 9
3. INFLUNCE OF AIR FLOW AROUND GROUND VEHICLE ...................................................................................... 9
3.1 INTERNAL FLOW....................................................................................................................................................... 10
3.2 EXTERNAL FLOW ...................................................................................................................................................... 10
3.3. BOUNDARY LAYER .................................................................................................................................................. 10
3.4 LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER FLOW ................................................................................................................ 11
3.5. TURBULENT BOUNDARY LAYER FLOW ......................................................................................................... 11
4. METHODOLGY .................................................................................................................................................................... 12
4.1. Wind Tunnel Analysis ............................................................................................................................................. 12
Advantages of a closed type wind tunnels......................................................................................................... 13
Disadvantages of a closed type wind tunnel ..................................................................................................... 13
4.3. WIND TUNNEL TEST: ............................................................................................................................................. 13
4.4. Blockage ratio calculation for wind tunnel: .................................................................................................. 14
5. CFD ANALYSIS: .................................................................................................................................................................. 15
K-EPSILON TURBULANCE MODEL: ...................................................................................................................... 15
Advantages of K- Epsilon Turbulence model: .................................................................................................. 15
Disadvantage of K-Epsilon Turbulence model: ............................................................................................... 15
Reynolds Average Navier Stoke ............................................................................................................................. 15
WALL Y+: ......................................................................................................................................................................... 16
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
2 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
5.1. Simulation setups: .................................................................................................................................................... 17
5.1.1. Blockage ratio calculation for CFD wind tunnel setup: .................................................................... 17
5.1.2. Pc Performance Parameter Consideration ................................................................................................. 18
5.1.3. Mesh parameters: ................................................................................................................................................. 18
5.2. PHYSICS MODELS: ................................................................................................................................................... 20
6. WIND TUNNEL RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS: ..................................................................................................... 20
Coefficient of Drag: ...................................................................................................................................................... 20
Coefficient of Lift: ......................................................................................................................................................... 21
Coefficient of Side Force: .......................................................................................................................................... 21
Pitching Moment Coefficient: .................................................................................................................................. 21
Rolling Moment Coefficient: .................................................................................................................................... 21
Yawing Moment Coefficient: ................................................................................................................................... 22
Calculating Reynolds Number: ............................................................................................................................... 22
7.2. Wind tunnel data plots: ......................................................................................................................................... 22
7.2.1. Force coefficients vs Yaw angle: ................................................................................................................ 24
7.2.2. Moment Coefficient vs Yaw angle: ............................................................................................................ 25
7.2.3. Force and moment coefficients vs slant angle: .................................................................................... 26
8. CFD ANALYSIS RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS: ...................................................................................................... 27
8.1. GRID INDEPENDENCY STUDY: ........................................................................................................................... 27
8.2. CFD RESULTS VS WIND TUNNEL TEST RESULTS: ..................................................................................... 28
8.3. POST PROCESSING................................................................................................................................................... 30
Cell Relative Velocity ........................................................................................................................................ 30
Pressure Coefficient. ......................................................................................................................................... 30
Wall Y+ .................................................................................................................................................................... 31
Iso-Pressure Coefficients ................................................................................................................................ 32
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
3 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Velocity magnitude ............................................................................................................................................ 33
10. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................................................... 34
Bibliography ............................................................................................................................................................................ 35
11. APPENDIX ......................................................................................................................................................................... 37
List of figures Figure 1 -Air Flow Around Vehicle ............................................................................................................... 6
Figure 2- BOUNDARY LAYERS ...................................................................................................................... 11
Figure 3- WIND TUNNEL MODEL WITH OPEN SECTION AND CLOSED LOOP .............................................. 12
Figure 4 - Image of Test Piece ..................................................................................................................... 13
Figure 5-Wall Y+ (CD-ADAPCO, 2012) ......................................................................................................... 16
Figure 6Pc Performance Graph (CD-ADAPCO, 2012) .................................................................................. 18
Figure 7- CFD Mesh model .......................................................................................................................... 19
Figure 8- Mesh Properties ........................................................................................................................... 19
Figure 9- Drag force Vs Re ........................................................................................................................... 22
Figure 10-Lift force Vs Re ............................................................................................................................ 23
Figure 11-Pitching coefficient Vs Re ........................................................................................................... 23
Figure 12-force coefficient Vs Yaw Angle ................................................................................................... 24
Figure 13- Moment Coefficient Vs Yaw angle ............................................................................................. 25
Figure 14-force coefficient Vs Slant Angle .................................................................................................. 26
Figure 15-Moment Coefficient Vs Slant angle ............................................................................................ 26
Figure 16: Coefficient of drag for 19 degree ........................................................................................... 37
Figure 17: Drag Force for 19 degree ........................................................................................................ 38
Figure 18: Iso-Pressure Coefficient for 19 degree .................................................................................. 38
Figure 19: Coefficient of lift for 19 degree............................................................................................... 39
Figure 20: Lift force for 19 degree ........................................................................................................... 39
Figure 21: Mesh Scene for 19 degree ....................................................................................................... 40
Figure 22: Pressure Coefficient for 19 degree ........................................................................................ 40
Figure 23: Cell Relative velocity for 19 degree ....................................................................................... 41
Figure 24: Velocity Magnitude for 19 degree .......................................................................................... 41
Figure 25: Velocity for 19 degree ............................................................................................................. 42
Figure 26: Wall Y+ for 19 degree ............................................................................................................. 42
Figure 27: Total Pressure coefficient for 25 degree ............................................................................... 43
Figure 28: Coefficient of lift for for 25 degree ......................................................................................... 43
Figure 29: Lift force for 25 degree ........................................................................................................... 44
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
4 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 30: Pressure Coefficient for 25 degree ........................................................................................ 44
Figure 31: Residuals for 25 degree .......................................................................................................... 45
Figure 32: Velocity Magnitude for 25 degree .......................................................................................... 45
Figure 33: Velocity for 25 degree ............................................................................................................. 46
Figure 34: Wall Y+ for 25 degree ............................................................................................................. 46
Figure 35: Mesh Scene for 25 degree ....................................................................................................... 47
Figure 36: Cell relative velocity for 25 degree ........................................................................................ 47
Figure 37: Coefficient of drag for 25 degree ........................................................................................... 48
Figure 38: Drag Force for 25 degree ........................................................................................................ 48
Figure 39: Residuals for 31 degree .......................................................................................................... 49
Figure 40: Velocity magnitude for 31 degree .......................................................................................... 49
Figure 41: Velocity for for 31 degree ....................................................................................................... 50
Figure 42: Wall Y+ for 31 degree ............................................................................................................. 50
Figure 43: Coefficient of drag for 31 degree ........................................................................................... 51
Figure 44: Drag force for 31 degree ......................................................................................................... 51
Figure 45: Velocity for 31 degree ............................................................................................................. 52
Figure 46: Coefficient of Lift for 31 degree ............................................................................................. 52
Figure 47: Lift Force for 31 degree .......................................................................................................... 53
Figure 48: Mesh Scene for 31 degree ....................................................................................................... 53
Figure 49: Pressure Coefficient for 31 degree ........................................................................................ 54
Figure 50: Cell relative velocity for 31 degree ........................................................................................ 54
Figure 51: Velocity magnitude for 37 degree .......................................................................................... 55
Figure 52: Velocity for 37 degree ............................................................................................................. 55
Figure 53: Wall Y+ for 37 degree ............................................................................................................. 56
Figure 54: Drag Coefficient for 37 degree ............................................................................................... 58
Figure 55: Drag Force for 37 degree ........................................................................................................ 58
Figure 56: pressure coefficients for 37 degree ....................................................................................... 59
Figure 57: Lift Coefficient for 37 degree .................................................................................................. 59
Figure 58: Lift Force for 37 degree .......................................................................................................... 60
Figure 59: Mesh Scene for 37 degree ....................................................................................................... 60
Figure 60: Pressure Coefficient for 37 degree ........................................................................................ 61
Figure 61: Cell relative velocity for 37 degree ........................................................................................ 61
Figure 62: Residuals for 37 degree .......................................................................................................... 62
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
5 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Abstract
In the present time of modern computer age, a computation fluid dynamic analysis has
surfaced as a successful substitute of actual wind tunnel test because of multiple reasons of cost,
time and resources available. The development of super computers and modern networking
architecture supporting the high tech processors, Computational Fluid Dynamics has gained a lot of
popularity.
This report focusses on the aerodynamic investigation of various forces acting on the
Lynne Turner model of the car provided in this coursework. The magnitude and impact of the
forces had been analyzed through a wind tunnel test and a simulation through the computational
fluid dynamics software called STAR CCM+.
In the following report a brief description of the wind tunnel test, Computational fluid
dynamics, types of flows and boundary layer is given along with the comparison of results of CFD
analysis and actual wind tunnel test. Remaining part of the report provides a detailed description of
the test set up, its methodology and physical conditions of the wind tunnel. The report also
provides information about the wind tunnel testing procedure and CFD analysis procedure. The
comparison of the test results has been done in the later part of report by the help of suitable graph
and excels data spreadsheet
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
6 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
1. INTRODUCTION
The term aerodynamics refers to the study of flow of air around
any given body (car in this case). It is one of the most sensitive areas of the vehicular development
as it incorporates both the performance and design. Aerodynamics has been closely associated
more with performance than style. Thus it becomes very important for the designers to come up
with a design which is aerodynamically successful and easy to manufacture. Years of research and
performance valuation has shown that aerodynamically efficient vehicles provides better driving
experience, improved performance at high speeds and cornering and a better fuel economy. Hence,
on considering the aforementioned, aerodynamic performance consideration of the vehicle
becomes very important.
Through this report the objective of measurement of aerodynamic forces, the
moments & their coefficients on Lynne turner model has been accomplished and interpreted
through the CFD analysis and its comparison with the actual wind tunnel test. The benchmark study
of the influence of yaw angle and Reynolds number on the aerodynamic has also been described in
the following report
Figure 1 -Air Flow Around Vehicle
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
7 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
According to (Hucho, 2013) a moving vehicle is subjected to the flow of air which can be classified
as following –
Air Flow around the vehicle
Air Flow through the body
Air flow within the machine/vehicle’s engine and transmission
The study of above given parameters is imperative while studying the aerodynamic analysis of
the vehicle. The vehicle is also subjected externally to air. The external exposure of the air has a
direct impact on the performance of the vehicle and its directional stability.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
The fluid flow in the aerodynamic analysis study is based on certain principles which are
discussed below.
2.1. BERNOULLI’S PRINCIPLE
According to the Bernoulli’s principle for a fluid flow without any viscosity, any
increase in the speed of the fluid occurs at the same time of decrease in the fluid’s potential energy.
This principle is applicable in various fluid flow applications and is valid for incompressible flows.
Bernoulli’s principle can be also be derived from the conservation of energy theory, according to
which sum of all the energy in a fluid along a streamline is same at all points. This can also be
represented by the help of following equation (Princeton uiversity, n.d.)-
𝒑 +𝟏
𝟐𝝆𝒗𝟐 + 𝝆𝒈𝒉 = 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒕𝒂𝒏𝒕
Where, p= pressure v= velocity g= gravitational acceleration h = Elevation.
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
8 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
2.2. REYNOLDS NUMBER
In simple terms Reynolds number is a dimensionless quantity which is used in the
determination of flow patterns at different points/stages during any flow. It can also be expressed
as the ratio of inertia forces to viscous forces (NASA, 2014). Reynolds number is very useful in the
study of fluid flow dynamics. It is sometimes used to classify the difference between laminar and
turbulent flow. Laminar flow occurs at Lower values of Reynolds Number which consists of air
molecules in smooth and continuous motion and Turbulent flow occurs at higher values of
Reynolds characterized by air molecules in random/distorted motion. (NASA, 2014)
In the aerodynamic analysis of any body, the boundary layer and its thickness are
one of the key factors which govern the drag and lift on the body. Reynolds number holds a relation
between the values of density, size and the viscosity of the flow which is given in the form of an
equation-
𝑹𝒆 =𝝆 ∗ 𝑽 ∗ 𝑳
𝝁
Where, ρ – Density of air
V – Velocity of air L – Length of vehicle 𝜇 – Dynamic viscosity of air.
2.3. Mach number
Mach number is defined as the ratio between the velocity of air and velocity of sound. The
Mach number is used to find the state of the flow whether it should be considered as compressible
flow or an incompressible flow. (Atlee M. Cunningham, 1987)
𝑴𝒂𝒄𝒉 𝒏𝒐 = 𝒖
𝑪
Where, u - Air flow velocity C – Speed of sound.
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
9 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M < 1 Subsonic
M = 1 Transonic
1< M < 3 Supersonic
M > 5 Hypersonic
Table 1- MACH NUMBER (Benson, 2014)
Calculations: Velocity of air = 45 m/s Speed of sound = 330 m/s
𝑀 = 45
330
𝑴 = 𝟎. 𝟏𝟑𝟔
(M = 0.136) < 0.2, this is subsonic. Therefore it can be consider as an incompressible flow.
2.4. DRAG & LIFT FORCES
Drag is force which is created by an object moving in the parallel direction of the
fluid flow. It is an inevitable consequence of the flow of any liquid. Drag is of two types form drag
which is dependent on the shape of the object and Induced Drag which is dependent on the viscous
friction between the object and fluid flow.
Lift is a downward acting force which generated in the perpendicular direction of
the travel of the object moving through a fluid. (Zuo, n.d.)
3. INFLUNCE OF AIR FLOW AROUND GROUND VEHICLE
The air flow on the body of a vehicle is a very important factor to be considered
while performing the aerodynamic analysis. The flow of air during the study of an aerodynamics
analysis can be of two types internal and external. The internal flow of air is the flow of air inside
the engine and transmission whereas the external flow of air is basically the flow of air outside the
body of a vehicle.
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
10 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
3.1 INTERNAL FLOW
Internal flow of air is the flow inside the car’s body, around the engine and
transmission lines. According to (Hucho, 2013) the internal flow cannot be divided into viscous
boundary layer flow close to the walls of flow and far away from the walls of flow. This viscous
boundary layer flow is characterized by Reynolds Number.
3.2 EXTERNAL FLOW
The external flow is the flow of air outside the body of car. At a constant velocity of
air when no separation of the layer of air is taking place, the viscous effects of the flow is restricted
inside that layer. But at higher velocities the boundary layer gets imposed by a higher pressure
layer which gets separated from the surface of the car due to high velocities. At the point where the
flow separation takes place the boundary layer gets dispersed. The separation of boundary layer
takes place generally at the end/rear part of vehicle. (Hucho, 2013)
At some distance from the vehicle the difference between the velocity of air and the
free stream becomes zero because of which there exists no boundary layer. This point is very
important considering the fact that aerodynamic analysis of a vehicle depends completely on the
formation of a boundary layer.
3.3. BOUNDARY LAYER
Boundary layer is a layer which is formed right next to the surface of the subject body where the
effect of viscosity is imperative. The boundary stars growing from zero at the beginning/start of the
body under study. As the flow velocity increases the friction between surface and the fluid layer
increases which results in the growth of boundary layer. As the thickness of the boundary layer
increases the velocity gradient starts diminishing. The molecules of the air flow are in rapid motion
at the top end of the boundary layer as compared to the molecules near to the surface of the vehicle.
The flow outside the boundary layer constantly tries to change the shape of boundary layer because
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
11 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
of high velocity gradient. (Karthik, 2011)
Figure 2- BOUNDARY LAYERS
3.4 LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER FLOW
In a boundary layer at the initial stages laminar flow exists in which the flow of air is
uniform. This flow is usually present in the front of the vehicle which causes the layers of air to slide
over each other. It’s because of this fact the skin friction drag is least in the front of car. (Karthik,
2011)
3.5. TURBULENT BOUNDARY LAYER FLOW
As the boundary layer grows the flow of layers of air gains velocity and instability in
the layer starts developing. This results in the transition from laminar to turbulent flow. In this
layer the flow is usually stuck to the stuck of the subject body and is in a stream lined shape. The
skin friction drag increases with the turbulent layer because of the motion of the air particles.
(Karthik, 2011)
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
12 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
4. METHODOLGY
There are mainly three methods for studying the air flow around the vehicle.
Driving on-road
Wind tunnel testing
CFD Analysis.
4.1. Wind Tunnel Analysis
A wind tunnel is the testing ground of aerodynamic properties of any
subject body. With increase in the demand of highly efficient vehicles in terms of aerodynamic
performance, fuel consumption and driving experience it has become a matter of immense
importance that all sorts of real time testing possible is done on the vehicle prior to the production.
A wind tunnel is usually a circular shape passage wherein a vehicle is mounted in the middle
against the flow of air. The flow of air created by the help of powerful fans and they are configured
accordingly to support the required amount of air pressure. The wind tunnels can be either closed
type or open type. The wind tunnel used in this coursework is a closed type because it offers a great
amount of energy conservation and sustenance in the wind pressure. Though one of the problem
associated with such types of wind tunnels is the high maintenance cost of the fans and cooling
utilities to cool the motors.
Figure 3- WIND TUNNEL MODEL WITH OPEN SECTION AND CLOSED LOOP
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
13 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Advantages of a closed type wind tunnels
Following are the advantages of a closed type wind tunnel (NASA, 2014)
It offers a superior flow in the test facility.
It has a low cost of operation.
The entire operation is generally quite.
Disadvantages of a closed type wind tunnel
Following are the disadvantages of a closed type of wind tunnel (NASA, 2014)
The cost of setting up of test facility is higher.
This type of design is not suitable for smoke and emission visualization.
During the course of testing the temperature tends to rise because of constant air flow.
4.3. WIND TUNNEL TEST:
The wind tunnel test section used for the testing is a closed loop open section wind
tunnel. The Lynne Turner model is fastened to the two pole balancing strut on the test table. The
force acting on the models are read by the moments acting on the balancing strut.
Figure 4 - Image of Test Piece
The wind tunnel test experiment is conducted by the following procedure;
The base line model is fasted to the balancing strut with 0 yaw angle; the model is exposed
to different velocities of 15, 25, 35 and 45m/s respectively. The corresponding forces,
moments and its respective coefficients are noted through the computerized output.
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
14 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
The same procedure is followed for the same model with different yaw angles of 2, 4, 6,
8 and 10 respectively for a constant velocity of 45m/s. The corresponding computerized
outputs are noted.
Keeping the velocity at a constant 45m/s the Lynne Turner model is configured for
different slant angles as specified below.
S.NO Air velocity
(m/s)
Diffuser angle (Deg) Boat-tail angle (Deg) Slant angle (Deg)
1 45 0 0 0
2 45 0 0 19
3 45 0 0 25
4 45 0 0 31
5 45 0 0 37
Table 2-Wind tunnel experimental Input Datas
4.4. Blockage ratio calculation for wind tunnel:
The wind tunnel has some limitations when compared to a real road, its dimension
of frontal area influence the flow velocity over the body of the vehicle which is subjected to air flow.
According to Bernoulli’s equation for a constant density, the velocity of air changes with area. Thus
the recruitment of blockage correction is crucial for the accuracy of results.
Blockage ratio of the wind tunnel is a percentage value that gives out the ratio of
frontal area of car to the frontal area of wind tunnel. The blockage ratio calculation is important for
the scaling of the model, depending on the available wind tunnel test section. (CD-ADAPCO, 2012)
Blockage Ratio = 𝑭𝒓𝒐𝒏𝒕𝒂𝒍 𝒂𝒓𝒆𝒂 𝒐𝒇 𝑪𝒂𝒓
𝑨𝒓𝒆𝒂 𝒐𝒇 𝒘𝒊𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒖𝒏𝒏𝒆𝒍 𝑶𝒖𝒕𝒍𝒆𝒕 x 100
Frontal area of Car = 0.0292m2
Area of wind tunnel outlet = 1.3m x 1m
=1.3m2
Blockage Ratio = 0.029
1.3 x 100 =2.23
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
15 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
5. CFD ANALYSIS:
Since the On-road testing and Wind tunnel testing were proved to be a tedious and a
costly method of finding the air flow around the vehicle. CFD was introduced to find the air flow
around the vehicle by mathematical computational equations which were comparatively cheaper,
easier and time efficient providing comparative results.
The CFD analysis for this simulation uses the following physics parameters which
are explained as follows.
K-EPSILON TURBULANCE MODEL:
The K-EPSILON model is used to solve the air flow around the bluff bodies; since it
performs well with the external flow of air through complex bodies. The K stands for the turbulent
kinetic energy and the Epsilon stands for the Dissipation of the kinetic energy. The K-Epsilon model
uses wall functions and has good convergence rate giving this model a good advantage for external
flow problem solving. If K and Epsilon are known we can model the turbulence viscosity as the
equation given below.
𝑽𝒕 ∝ 𝝑𝒍 ∝ 𝒌𝟏
𝟐⁄ 𝒌𝟑
𝟐⁄
𝜺=
𝒌𝟐
𝜺 (Karthik, 2011)
Advantages of K- Epsilon Turbulence model:
Relatively simple implement
It leads to a stable computing which can converge result relatively easily.
It has reasonable predictions for many flows (Karthik, 2011)
Disadvantage of K-Epsilon Turbulence model:
Require wall function for implementation.
Only fully turbulent flows are validated.
Poor prediction for flow with strong separations. (Karthik, 2011)
Reynolds Average Navier Stoke
The Reynolds average Navier stokes calculates the velocity directly without the computational
requirement for series of repetitive steps during the simulation solving, thus reducing the
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
16 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
magnitude of original Navier Stokes equation. The RANS model uses a time dependent velocity
fluctuation which separates the mean flow velocity. (symscape, 2006).
WALL Y+:
“The law of the wall explains that the average velocity of a turbulent flow at some point is
proportional to the logarithm of the distance from that point to the wall”. (CD-ADAPCO, 2014) The
Y+ stands for the wall coordinates. Y is dimensionless because of the velocity 𝑢𝑟 and kinematic
viscosity 𝜈
𝒚+ =𝒚𝒖𝝉
𝝂 , 𝒖𝝉 = √
𝝉𝝎
𝝆
𝒖+ =𝒖
𝒖𝝉 , 𝒖+ =
𝟏
𝒌𝒍𝒏𝒚+ + 𝑩. (CD-ADAPCO, 2014).
Y= the distance of the wall. u= friction velocity or shear. V= kinematic velocity. = wall shear stress. = fluid density. U+ = dimensionless velocity. U= velocity parallel to the wall. K= Von Karman’s constant (≈ .41) B= Constant (≈ 5.1)
Figure 5-Wall Y+ (CD-ADAPCO, 2012)
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
17 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
5.1. Simulation setups:
For CFD analysis, the Lynne Turner model, created using CAD software is been
imported in Star CCM+. The model dimensions are been verified to that of the wind tunnel test
piece using the scale operation.
The frontal area of the Lynne turner model is calculated using the dimensions measured.
Based on the dimensions measured the frontal area of the wind tunnel is calculated using
the Blockage ratio. The blockage ratio was assumed to 5%. The Blockage ratio is considered
since the model occupies a partial space inside the tunnel thus confining the space inside
the tunnel. This in turn increases the air velocity giving very large force values.
5.1.1. Blockage ratio calculation for CFD wind tunnel setup:
The Blockage ratio of the wind tunnel was assumed to be 5%,
Blockage ratio = 𝒇𝒓𝒐𝒏𝒕𝒂𝒍 𝒂𝒓𝒆𝒂 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒄𝒂𝒓
𝒇𝒓𝒐𝒏𝒕𝒂𝒍 𝒂𝒓𝒆𝒂 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒘𝒊𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒖𝒏𝒏𝒆𝒍 (CD-ADAPCO, 2012)
Frontal area of the car = 0.0292m2.
Frontal area of the wind tunnel = 0.0292
0.05
Frontal area of wind tunnel = 0.584m2
From the Frontal area of the tunnel the height and width of the tunnel is calculated for its
creation.
The length of the wind tunnel is determined by using the length of the model used; keeping
twice the length of the model in front and five times the length at the back.
The symmetry plane is created to reduce the computational time and memory.
The Volume of interest is created using the subtract option.
The VOI created is meshed using the following parameters.
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
18 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
5.1.2. Pc Performance Parameter Consideration
Based on number of mesh cells pc performance evaluation is shown below.
Figure 6Pc Performance Graph (CD-ADAPCO, 2012)
5.1.3. Mesh parameters:
1. The meshes selected for the computation are Surface remesher, automatic surface repair for
surface meshing, polyhedral meshes for volumetric meshing and prism layer meshes for
refining the targeted surface.
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
19 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 7- CFD Mesh model
2. The base mesh size is taken as 0.2m based on the grid independency study.
3. The surface growth rate is taken as 1.1 to produce a gradual increase in the mesh size.
4. The prism layer meshes helps in blending the walls from closer range to far fields. (CD-
ADAPCO, 2012). The number of Prism layer is given as 14 so as to increase the refinement
of the prism layer mesh cells to improve the computational results on the targeted surface
and to get a lower wall Y+.
5. The prism layer thickness is taken as 2mm and stretching of 1.3 to obtain a finer prism
layer, low Y+ value and better pressure coefficient.
6. The custom controls functions are created with two surface controls that occupy the
parental values for the model and the wind tunnel surface. Three volumetric controls are
created for getting a well refined gradually growing mesh.
7.
Figure 8- Mesh Properties
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
20 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
5.2. PHYSICS MODELS:
1. Since there is no temperature variance in this simulation constant density is selected.
2. The flow is considered to be segregated flow since the flow is subsonic and incompressible.
The boundary layer is assigned to be turbulent as the velocity through the tunnel is high
since the calculated Reynolds number is Re≥ 5 × 105. (refer Apendix)
3. Since it is a volumetric analysis three dimensional gradients is selected.
4. The K-Epsilon turbulence modeled is chosen for this simulation and is explain earlier.
5. Realizable K-Epsilon turbulence model is selected for improving the boundary layer
performance and to enhance the streamline curvature.
6. WIND TUNNEL RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS:
Below given are the values of forces and moments obtained from the wind tunnel test.
Forces Obtained: Moments Obtained:
Pitching Moment -0.97 Nm
Rolling Moment 1.1 Nm
Yawing Moment 0.084 Nm
Known data:
Air density 𝜌 = 1.225 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3
Wind tunnel speed = 45 m/s
Frontal area of the Lynne Turner model = 0.0292m2.
Length of the Lynne Turner model L = 0.525m.
Coefficient of Drag:
𝑫𝒓𝒂𝒈 𝑭𝒐𝒓𝒄𝒆 =𝟏
𝟐𝑪𝑫 𝝆 𝑨 𝑽𝟐 (K. V. S. PAVAN, 2012)
𝐶𝐷 =Drag Force
12 𝜌 𝐴 𝑉2
𝐶𝐷 =13.96
0.5 𝑥 1.225 𝑥 0.029 𝑥 452 CD = 0.385
Drag Force 13.96 N
Lift Force -1.609 N
Side Force 0.855 N
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
21 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Coefficient of Lift:
𝑳𝒊𝒇𝒕 𝑭𝒐𝒓𝒄𝒆 =𝟏
𝟐 𝑪𝑳 𝝆 𝑨 𝑽𝟐 (K.V.S.PAVAN, 2012)
𝐶𝐷 =Lift Force
12
𝜌 𝐴 𝑉2
𝐶𝐿 =−1.609
0.5 𝑥 1.225 𝑥 0.029 𝑥 452 CL = -0.44
Coefficient of Side Force:
𝑺𝒊𝒅𝒆 𝑭𝒐𝒓𝒄𝒆 =𝟏
𝟐 𝑪𝑺 𝝆 𝑨 (K.V.S.PAVAN, 2012)
𝐶𝑆 =Side Force
12
𝜌 𝐴 𝑉2
𝐶𝑆 =0.855
0.5 𝑥 1.225 𝑥 0.029 𝑥 452 CS = 0.023
Pitching Moment Coefficient:
𝑷𝒊𝒕𝒄𝒉𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝑴𝒐𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕 =𝟏
𝟐 𝑪𝑴 𝝆 𝑨 𝑳 𝑽𝟐 (K.V.S.PAVAN, 2012)
𝐶𝑀 =Pitching Moment
12 𝜌 𝐴 𝐿 𝑉2
𝐶𝑀 =−0.97
0.5 𝑥 1.225 𝑥 0.0292 𝑥 0.52 𝑥 452 CM = -0.0051
Rolling Moment Coefficient:
𝑹𝒐𝒍𝒍𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝑴𝒐𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕 =𝟏
𝟐 𝑪𝑹 𝝆 𝑨 𝑳 𝑽𝟐 (K.V.S.PAVAN, 2012)
𝐶𝑅 =Pitching Moment
12 𝜌 𝐴 𝐿 𝑉2
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
22 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
𝐶𝑅 =1.1
0.5 𝑥 1.225 𝑥 0.0292 𝑥 0.52 𝑥 452 CM = 0.058
Yawing Moment Coefficient:
𝒀𝒂𝒘𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝑴𝒐𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕 =𝟏
𝟐 𝑪𝒀 𝝆 𝑨 𝑳 𝑽𝟐 (K. V. S. PAVAN, 2012)
𝐶𝑌 =Yawing Moment
12
𝜌 𝐴 𝐿 𝑉2
𝐶𝑅 =0.084
0.5 𝑥 1.225 𝑥 0.0292 𝑥 0.52 𝑥 452 CM = 0.00446
Calculating Reynolds Number:
𝑹𝒆 = 𝝆 𝒙 𝑽 𝒙 𝑳
𝝁 (K.V.S.PAVAN, 2012)
𝑅𝑒 = 1.225 𝑥 45 𝑥 0.52
1.983 𝑥 10−5 Re = 1.44x10-6
7.2. Wind tunnel data plots:
From the output of wind tunnel results the following graphs are plotted.
Figure 9- Drag force Vs Re
5.31E+05, 0.342
8.85E+05, 0.335
1.24E+06, 0.342
1.59E+06, 0.3270.326
0.328
0.33
0.332
0.334
0.336
0.338
0.34
0.342
0.344
5.00E+05 1.00E+06 1.50E+06
Dra
g Fo
rce
Co
eff
icie
nt
Reynolds number
Drag force VS Reynolds number
Drag force VS Reynoldsnumber
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
23 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 10-Lift force Vs Re
Figure 11-Pitching coefficient Vs Re
5.31E+05, 0.1
8.85E+05, 0.101
1.24E+06, 0.098
1.59E+06, 0.098
0.0975
0.098
0.0985
0.099
0.0995
0.1
0.1005
0.101
0.1015
5.00E+05 1.00E+06 1.50E+06
Lift
Fo
rce
Co
eff
icie
nt
Reynolds number
Lift force VS Reynolds number
Lift force VS Reynolds number
5.31E+05, 0.053
8.85E+05, 0.054
1.24E+06, 0.056
1.59E+06, 0.054
0.0525
0.053
0.0535
0.054
0.0545
0.055
0.0555
0.056
0.0565
5.00E+05 1.00E+06 1.50E+06
Lift
Fo
rce
Co
eff
icie
nt
Reynolds number
Pitching coefficient VS Reynolds number
Pitchingcoefficient VS…
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
24 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
7.2.1. Force coefficients vs Yaw angle:
Figure 12-force coefficient Vs Yaw Angle
When the yaw angle is increased from 0 to 10 the drag force coefficient has very
negligible variance. Whereas the side force coefficient has a linear depletion on the negative axis
corresponding to the change in yaw angles. From the graph it is clear that the lift force coefficient
has a minimal variance due to the induced lift caused by the side force.
-0.6
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Fro
ce c
oe
ffic
ien
t
Yaw angle
Froce coefficient Vs Yaw Angle
Drag Force Coefficient
Side Force Coefficient
Lift Force Coefficient
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
25 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
7.2.2. Moment Coefficient vs Yaw angle:
Figure 13- Moment Coefficient Vs Yaw angle
As mentioned above in case of moment coefficient the pitching moment stays stable
with a very slight variance. Whereas the rolling moment increases linearly with the change in
angles; thus it can be deduced that the side force is responsible for rolling. Also a slight change in
yawing moment is observed due to the change in yaw angles. This change is due to the induced lift
caused by the rolling moment.
-0.01
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Mo
me
nt
coe
ffic
ien
t
Yaw angle
Moment coefficient Vs Yaw Angle
Rolling Moment Coefficient
Pitching Moment Coefficient
Yawing Moment Coefficient
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
26 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
7.2.3. Force and moment coefficients vs slant angle:
Figure 14-force coefficient Vs Slant Angle
Figure 15-Moment Coefficient Vs Slant angle
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0 10 20 30 40 50
Fro
ce c
oe
ffic
ien
t
Slant angle
Froce coefficient Vs Slant Angle
Drag Force Coefficient
Side Force Coefficient
Lift Force Coefficient
-0.03
-0.02
-0.01
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0 10 20 30 40 50
Mo
me
nt
coe
ffic
ien
t
Slant angle
Moment coefficient Vs Slant Angle
Rolling Moment Coefficient
Pitching Moment Coefficient
Yawing Moment Coefficient
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
27 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
The graph trend shows that side force and drag force coefficients are maintained
constant. Whereas the lift force coefficient increases linearly up to 19 degrees from the baseline
model. After which the lift force coefficient decreases slightly and remains constant. From here the
baseline model has lower lift force whereas the model with 19 deg slant angle has the highest lift
force this may be due to the flow separation.
The graph trend lines shows that the yawing and the rolling moment coefficients are
stable with the change in slant angles. Whereas the pitching moment is high on 19 deg slant angle
because the air velocity on the surface will be higher till the beginning of slant angle once it passes
the slant angle the flow separates because of this a low pressure zone is formed at the rear which is
the reason for pitching moment variance. (dileep.P menon, 2014)
8. CFD ANALYSIS RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS:
8.1. GRID INDEPENDENCY STUDY:
The grid independency study is performed before simulating the model to find an
appropriate mesh cell size that can reduce the computational effort and time. The grid
independency study is carried out by simulating a single model with different base mesh size.
While comparing the Cd values of all the simulation at particular mesh size the Cd value remains
constant, this shows the appropriate mesh size for the model to be simulated. (CD-ADAPCO, 2014)
Sr. No. BASE SIZE COEFFICIENT
OF DRAG
NUMBER OF
CELLS
1 0.30 0.45 415617
2 0.35 0.43 549376
3 0.20 0.425 1123077
4 0.18 0.423 1494707
Table 3- Grid Independency
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
28 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
From the mesh independence study it has been concluded that a base size of 0.20 could be an ideal
base size. The aforementioned is based on the observation of the values of coefficient of drag. From
the above table it can be seen that the value of coefficient of drag starts repeating at a base size of
0.2, thus the corresponding values of number cells obtained direct us towards the selection of
coarser mesh for reducing time and memory.
8.2. CFD RESULTS VS WIND TUNNEL TEST RESULTS:
ANGLES 0 19 25 31 37
COFFIECIENT OF DRAG 0.327 0.292 0.288 0.312 0.319 WIND
TUNNEL
0.4036 0.3821 0.4084 0.3745 0.4105 CFD
COFFIECIENT OF LIFT 0.098 0.405 0.354 0.34 0.327 WIND
TUNNEL
0.00363 0.3692 0.3002 0.2445 0.2847 CFD
DRAG FORCE (In
Newton)
13.961 12.5 12.352 13.438 13.789 WIND
TUNNEL
14.64 13.86 14.8 13.58 14.88 CFD
LIFT FORCE (In Newton) -1.606 12.295 10.025 9.364 9.386 WIND
TUNNEL
0.135 13.39 10.88 8.86 10.32 CFD
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
29 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
The change in values when compared with wind tunnel and CFD analysis is mainly because of the
following mentioned point –
1. Type of test set up: Since the wind tunnel was an open section so the air velocity wasn’t
constant throughout but was decreasing by a very small magnitude. In CFD analysis the
wind was a completely closed set up wherein the natural factors of diminishing air velocity
doesn’t affects the values.
2. The actual blockage ratio was calculated to be 2.2% for the wind tunnel set up whereas in
case of CFD analysis the blockage ratio was assumed to be 5% due to the CFD processing set
up which affects the air velocity directly thus giving higher values.
3. According to (dileep.P menon, 2014)40% of the drag is happening on the rear end of the
vehicle. While investigating the given model with slant angles as 0,19,25,31 and 47 degrees,
it can be concluded that the coefficient of lift is lower for the vehicle which comes under the
category of SUV which have a slant angle of 0 degree. Whereas the hatch back is considered
to have the worst value of coefficient of lift with the angle of 19 degree and without a boot
the flow around the vehicle crates a sudden change in flow separation which creates a
negative force behind the vehicle which leads to the generation of increased lift force of the
vehicle.
4. On investigating the remaining slant angles though there was a flow separation due to the
presence of boot section a separation bubble is formed between the slant angle and the boot
section which gives a reaction force against the lift. Hence it provides a better lift to drag
ratio and gives a good stability
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
30 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
8.3. POST PROCESSING
In this section of the report the post processing of the base line model has been discussed.
Cell Relative Velocity
From the below given image it can interpreted that the relative velocity around the vehicle body
is smooth and has a constant distribution which ranges from 0 to 45.
Pressure Coefficient.
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
31 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
From the above given image it can interpreted that the pressure coefficient around the body of
the given model varies which ranges between -3 to 1. It can be seen from the above figure that the
pressure value sis maximum at the intersecting point of bonnet and wind screen.
Wall Y+
As the model has enhanced wall treatment and a very refined prism layers formed around the
body thus it has obtained a low Y+ value. It should be technically in the region of 0 to 5.
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
32 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Iso-Pressure Coefficients
From the above image it can be seen that the Iso-pressure coefficients acts uniformly
throughout the body, except from the spaces between the bonnet and wind shield. The
pressure coefficient has extended in the rear end of the model due to the vacuum created as
well as near the wheels.
Velocity
From the above given image it can be seen that the major portion of air stagnation occurs at the
front bumper and gradually deflects to the upper surface and the lower body. There are certain
separation bubbles formed near the intersection of bonnet and wind screen and at the rear end
because of the vacuum space created, thus allowing the circulation of air to cause the vortex
formation (in blue color)
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
33 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Velocity magnitude
From the above image it can be seen that the air flows around the body; in the regions of
separation recirculation air bubbles or vortices are created due to the presence of vacuum. The side
s of the model clearly shows that the velocity is higher because of the stagnation on the frontal area.
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
34 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
10. CONCLUSION
From the CFD analysis and wind tunnel tests and evaluation it has been concluded that the
aerodynamic forces act majorly on the rear end. On comparing the results of both the tests the
magnitude in the values of results obtained are mainly because of the set up conditions and the
physical environmental set up.
On comparing the values of different models the baseline model has found to be having the
lowest lift and high drag force whereas the 19 degree slant angled hatch back model has the highest
lift force because of the inappropriate pressure gradient found near the rear end. The models of the
remaining slant angles have average lift, rolling and pitching moments. The entire coursework
exercise provided the group with a better understanding of the air flow on the vehicle body and the
impacts of modern day wind tunnel & CFD based tests facilities on the vehicle performance.
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
35 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Bibliography
Anon., 1993. turbulence modelling for CFD. D.C: Wilcox.
Atlee M. Cunningham, G. S. S., 1987. A Study of the effect of Reyonlds Number and Mach Number on
Constant Pressure Coefficient Jump for Shock-incluced Triangle- edge Seperation. NASA Contractor
Report, p. 79.
Benson, T., 2014. NASA. [Online]
Available at: http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/k-12/airplane/mach.html
[Accessed 2015 4 20].
CD-ADAPCO, 2012. star south east asian confrence. [Online]
Available at: http://www.cd-
adapco.com/sites/default/files/Presentation/SEA%20Conference%202012_CDadapco_VolumeMes
hing_Used_KM.pdf
[Accessed 22 4 2015].
CD-ADAPCO, 2014. youtube. [Online]
Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1UL4o9rdJs
[Accessed 2015 4 22].
Clancy, L. I., 1975. Aerodynamics. Newyork: Wiley.
dileep.P menon, s. k. G. S. K., 2014. to improve the aerodynamic performance of hatchback car with
the addition of a rear roof spoiler, BANGALORE: CFD SYMPO.
Hucho, W. H., 2013. Aerodynamics of road vehicles. s.l.:s.n.
K.V.S.PAVAN, 2012. CFD MODELING OF FLOW AROUND AHMED BODY, HYDERABAD: CD -ADAPCO
BANGLOORE.
Karthik, T., 2011. turbulence models and there applications, Chennai: Dpt of mechanical engineering
IIT Madras.
NASA, 2014. Reynolds Number. [Online]
Available at: http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/BGH/reynolds.html
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
36 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Princeton uiversity, n.d. Bernoulli's Equation. [Online]
Available at: http://www.princeton.edu/~asmits/Bicycle_web/Bernoulli.html
symscape, 2006. computational fluid dynamics software for all. [Online]
Available at: www.symscape.com/reynolds-averaged-navier-stokes-eqautions
[Accessed 22 4 2015].
V.Easwaran, G. a., 2002. turbulent flows- fundamentals, experiments and modelling.. s.l.:Narosa
Publishing house..
Zuo, W., n.d. Introduction of computational fluid dynamics. Jass 05, St. petersburg, p. 8.
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
37 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
11. APPENDIX
Supporting Images and Graphs for The Lynne Turner model with a slant angle of 19 degree.
Figure 16: Coefficient of drag for 19 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
38 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 17: Drag Force for 19 degree
Figure 18: Iso-Pressure Coefficient for 19 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
39 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 19: Coefficient of lift for 19 degree
Figure 20: Lift force for 19 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
40 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 21: Mesh Scene for 19 degree
Figure 22: Pressure Coefficient for 19 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
41 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 23: Cell Relative velocity for 19 degree
Figure 24: Velocity Magnitude for 19 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
42 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 25: Velocity for 19 degree
Figure 26: Wall Y+ for 19 degree
Supporting Images and Graphs for The Lynne Turner model with a slant angle of 25 degree.
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
43 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 27: Total Pressure coefficient for 25 degree
Figure 28: Coefficient of lift for for 25 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
44 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 29: Lift force for 25 degree
Figure 30: Pressure Coefficient for 25 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
45 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 31: Residuals for 25 degree
Figure 32: Velocity Magnitude for 25 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
46 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 33: Velocity for 25 degree
Figure 34: Wall Y+ for 25 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
47 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 35: Mesh Scene for 25 degree
Figure 36: Cell relative velocity for 25 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
48 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 37: Coefficient of drag for 25 degree
Figure 38: Drag Force for 25 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
49 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Supporting Images and Graphs for The Lynne Turner model with a slant angle of 31 degree.
Figure 39: Residuals for 31 degree
Figure 40: Velocity magnitude for 31 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
50 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 41: Velocity for for 31 degree
Figure 42: Wall Y+ for 31 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
51 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 43: Coefficient of drag for 31 degree
Figure 44: Drag force for 31 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
52 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 45: Velocity for 31 degree
Figure 46: Coefficient of Lift for 31 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
53 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 47: Lift Force for 31 degree
Figure 48: Mesh Scene for 31 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
54 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 49: Pressure Coefficient for 31 degree
Figure 50: Cell relative velocity for 31 degree
Supporting Images and Graphs for The Lynne Turner model with a slant angle of 37 degree.
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
55 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 51: Velocity magnitude for 37 degree
Figure 52: Velocity for 37 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
56 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 53: Wall Y+ for 37 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
57 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
58 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 54: Drag Coefficient for 37 degree
Figure 55: Drag Force for 37 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
59 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 56: pressure coefficients for 37 degree
Figure 57: Lift Coefficient for 37 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
60 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 58: Lift Force for 37 degree
Figure 59: Mesh Scene for 37 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
61 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 60: Pressure Coefficient for 37 degree
Figure 61: Cell relative velocity for 37 degree
M59MAE GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
M59MAE
62 M59MAE- GROUND VEHICLE AERODYNAMICS
Figure 62: Residuals for 37 degree