Author Topic: Aerodynamic vs. vehicle stabilty  (Read 83325 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline akk

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 64
  • owner of #920/928 Contrivance Special
Re: Aerodynamic vs. vehicle stabilty
« Reply #105 on: July 26, 2010, 09:38:08 AM »
OK, I want to stir this up a little....lets talk about cross winds!!!???!!!

In my mind aero stability (as in airplanes) is good if all tires are sliding....but, I feel aero stability (you know center of gravity in front of the center of pressure) makes a car more sensitive to cross winds!

Think about it... if you had a huge vertical tail fin on a 20 foot boom off the back of the car....The car would be a weather vane...it would turn in to the wind no matter what the driver wanted.

Akk
holder of AA/GMR A/GMR B/GMR C/GMR D/GMR E/GMR records

Offline Rex Schimmer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2638
  • Only time and money prevent completion!
Re: Aerodynamic vs. vehicle stabilty
« Reply #106 on: July 26, 2010, 11:25:21 AM »
Akk,
Move the fletching on an arrow to the front and try to shoot it. Make sure that nobody is around.

Rex
Rex

Not much matters and the rest doesn't matter at all.

Offline willieworld

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1818
Re: Aerodynamic vs. vehicle stabilty
« Reply #107 on: July 26, 2010, 12:17:26 PM »
my guess is the feathers will always stay to the rear of the arrow because of one reason  DRAG     willie buchta
willie-dpombatmir-buchta

Offline Seldom Seen Slim

  • Nancy and me and the pit bike
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13172
  • Nancy -- 201.913 mph record on a production ZX15!
    • Nancy and Jon's personal website.
Re: Aerodynamic vs. vehicle stabilty
« Reply #108 on: July 26, 2010, 01:39:40 PM »
Come up here, into the great white north, and spend a few winters driving in the snow and on icy roads - for months at a time.  It'll help you get the hang of drifting, countersteering, and using the throttle to get around turns.  It's also handy to know how to slide around when trying to grab that great parking spot on the other side of a crowded street.

There's a big difference between handling a vehicle on the slippery roads and on the race course - but there are some skills that are useful in both situations.
Jon E. Wennerberg
 a/k/a Seldom Seen Slim
 Skandia, Michigan
 (that's way up north)
2 Club member x2
Owner of landracing.com

Offline desotoman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2816
Re: Aerodynamic vs. vehicle stabilty
« Reply #109 on: July 26, 2010, 02:18:00 PM »

Eagerly awaiting tips on being able to give full throttle at low speeds on 2500hp and 106'' wheelbase car.
  

                               JL222
              

 :-D   You already know the answer to that.   :-o 8-) :evil:

Tom G.
I love the USA. How much longer will we be a free nation?

Asking questions is one's only way of getting answers.

The rational person lets verified facts form or modify his opinion.  The ideologue ignores verified facts which don't fit his preconceived opinions.

Offline jl222

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2967
Re: Aerodynamic vs. vehicle stabilty
« Reply #110 on: July 26, 2010, 02:35:35 PM »

Eagerly awaiting tips on being able to give full throttle at low speeds on 2500hp and 106'' wheelbase car.
  

                               JL222
              

 :-D   You already know the answer to that.   :-o 8-) :evil:

Tom G.

  I know the results ,no 200 mph club :roll: :-D


 JL222

Offline PorkPie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2044
  • think fast.....always
Re: Aerodynamic vs. vehicle stabilty
« Reply #111 on: July 26, 2010, 03:37:36 PM »

Eagerly awaiting tips on being able to give full throttle at low speeds on 2500hp and 106'' wheelbase car.
  

                               JL222
              

 :-D   You already know the answer to that.   :-o 8-) :evil:

Tom G.

  I know the results ,no 200 mph club :roll: :-D


 JL222

Go slow....and you go fast......... :-D
Pork Pie

Photoartist & Historian & 200 MPH Club Member (I/GL 202.8 mph in the orig. Bockscar #1000)

Offline hotrod

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
    • Black Horse photo
Re: Aerodynamic vs. vehicle stabilty
« Reply #112 on: July 26, 2010, 03:55:32 PM »
Quote
Think about it... if you had a huge vertical tail fin on a 20 foot boom off the back of the car....The car would be a weather vane...it would turn in to the wind no matter what the driver wanted.

Akk

You are right but that is a good thing within reason. A station wagon is inherently aero stable in that situation (ignoring issues like roll steer), when hit by a gust of cross wind the rear of the wagon has more side pressure than the front does and the car will yaw slightly into the wind. This means that it self corrects and the driver does not need to make any steering input to stay in their lane. In a car that has very square front fenders like the 1970's Ford Comet. They are a night mare to drive in gusty cross wind as the car yaws away from the wind when hit by a side gust which magnifies the course deviation from the intended path. In our chinook wind storms my Wagon is perfectly happy in a cross wind of 50 mph with gusts to 70 while traveling at 75 mph at right angles to the wind. I feel a slight wiggle when the car is hit by a gust but otherwise have no clue the wind is bad.

On several occasions I have been driving to work and noticed cars ahead of me weaving a bit and braking to slow down for no apparent reason only to realize that there is a strong cross wind I had not even noticed until I passed some trees and could see them bent back from the winds.

This is a good example of why your center of aero pressure is not a fixed and static thing, it can change dramatically if the effective wind is not coming head on to the car.

In the case of a car with a lot of rear sail area like a station wagon a wind at 15 degrees off axis moves the center of pressure toward the rear of the car (an inherently stable situation). A car with a bluff front and square sides (like a roadster) the exact opposite happens the center of pressure moves forward as the wind begins to take an "angle off the bow".

Cross winds can also dramatically change down force. In the 1980's vintage Corvettes a cross wind giving an effective wind vector about 15 degrees off axis would blow the high pressure air that normally collects on the upper part of the hood in front of the wind shield off the down wind side of the windshield effectively dumping all that down force and dramatically increasing front lift. Then as the down force disappeared the front of the car unloaded and lifted increasing the front drag and inducing a yaw away from the wind.

Sometimes the automotive engineers intentionally add roll steer to a cars suspension to help cancel out some of this cross wind motion.

If the car has balanced air drag front to rear when in a quartering wind, it simply moves sideways when hit by a cross wind gust, but maintains its heading (runs over timing lights perhaps), If it has a slight rear ward bias (sail area from a tail fin etc. or a station wagon like body style) it will help the driver stay on course by aerodynamically yawing into the quartering wind. If the side wind drag is biased forward, like a roadster,  with square vertical side panels on the engine compartment, and the very high drag or the radiator, the car wants to turn away from the gust. As it does the effective frontal area exposed to the air flow increases (a car has more frontal area viewed at 45 degrees than at 90 degrees and much more than when the wind is approaching head on) aero drag builds much faster on the front of the car than on the rear, as the air is trying to flow over the car body on a diagonal, so it wants to turn around.

If you look at a roadster at an angle of 15 - 20 degrees as the wind sees it at the beginning of a spin, you can see that the front of the car is much dirtier aerodynamically than the smooth trunk region. That means that as the car yaws away from the wind the center of pressure jumps forward a substantial amount, and your CG is suddenly behind the center of pressure, when while running in dead calm it might be slightly behind it.

This is a bad thing :)

Larry
« Last Edit: July 26, 2010, 07:30:13 PM by hotrod »

Offline nebulous

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 116
Re: Aerodynamic vs. vehicle stabilty
« Reply #113 on: July 26, 2010, 04:34:07 PM »
Willie
You seem to know, that you are smart enough,to know that you don't know everything! And
 Thats good!
 Keep making good stuff !
Jack
Jack Costella   
"Records are set by effort, not by the stroke of a pen!"

Offline Glen

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7024
  • SCTA/BNI timer 1983 to 2004, Retired,. Crew on Tur
Re: Aerodynamic vs. vehicle stabilty
« Reply #114 on: July 26, 2010, 05:21:06 PM »
The good thing at Bonneville is there are no guard rails etc along the course. This gives the driver a little flex room to let the vehicle drift and slowly bring it back with out over correcting. But the drivers still need to be heads up and use common sense.
Glen
Crew on Turbinator II

South West, Utah

Offline willieworld

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1818
Re: Aerodynamic vs. vehicle stabilty
« Reply #115 on: July 26, 2010, 11:50:30 PM »
jack   i will if they will quit changing the rules on me ---its about time i paid my mom a visit    willie buchta
willie-dpombatmir-buchta

Offline akk

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 64
  • owner of #920/928 Contrivance Special
Re: Aerodynamic vs. vehicle stabilty
« Reply #116 on: July 27, 2010, 07:50:43 AM »
Larry ...good points

To me stability in a car is about drive-ability...a car that lets the driver make the decisions...a car that does not suprise the driver...a car that is a careful balance of tradeoffs.

Shure... aero is a big part of stability at the speeds we run...but the car set up is the bottom line.

I hope the guys new to landspeed racing think about it. I hope the old guys keep sharing experience for safety sake!

In that regard...I am building a streamliner...would someone with experience talk about the yaw damping of the in line front wheels of some streamliners versus 4 wheel drive.  If you could only have one would you pick yaw damping of tires on the ground or a tail fin? And no I don't mean tail feathers first...a balanced car without eather feature. 

Akk

holder of AA/GMR A/GMR B/GMR C/GMR D/GMR E/GMR records

Offline nebulous

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 116
Re: Aerodynamic vs. vehicle stabilty
« Reply #117 on: July 30, 2010, 04:27:16 AM »
jl222

I like neutral steering for straight line control. 0 caster,0 camber 0 scrub 0 suspension. The driver must be in control. More important on a wide track vehicle. Thats what I do..
jack
Jack Costella   
"Records are set by effort, not by the stroke of a pen!"

Offline doug odom

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 413
    • popmotorsports.com
Re: Aerodynamic vs. vehicle stabilty
« Reply #118 on: July 30, 2010, 12:13:43 PM »
Wow Jack, zero caster. That is very interesting. I'm going to have to think about that.
Doug in big ditch even more confused than normal.
Doug Odom in big ditch

How old would you be now if you didn't know how old you are?
If you can't race it or take it to bed - it ain't worth having.

Offline SPARKY

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6912
Re: Aerodynamic vs. vehicle stabilty
« Reply #119 on: July 30, 2010, 09:40:31 PM »
Doug, I have been told by a circle tracker that he uses caster for "weight jacking" in the corners on certain tracks
Miss LIBERTY,  changing T.K.I.  to noise, dust, rust, BLUE HATS & hopefully not scrap!!

"Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure or nothing."   Helen Keller

We are going to explore the racing N words NITROUS & NITRO!