Automotion CF A-pillar winglet attachment?
#17
Addict Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Site Sponsor
The air that was going over the car close to the door opening would become turbulent and the yarn tufts would be going in all directions. This then screwed up the air flow as it went back to the wing.
So one thing screwed up another thing and it just made others worse.
Bill
__________________
OG Racing
Your Source For Motorsports Equipment
WWW.OGRACING.COM
800.934.9112
703.430.3303
info@ogracing.com
Sparco's Largest Distributor for 28 Years
PFC Distributor for 27 Years
Pagid, Alpinestars, MOMO, OMP, Hawk, Bell, Aim, G-Force, HJC,
HANS, Arai, Simpson, Brey Krause, Longacre, CoolShirt!
Supplying Track Junkies for 34 Years.
PCA Club Racing - National Sponsor Since 1998
A Veteran Owned Business
Check out our blog!
OG Racing
Your Source For Motorsports Equipment
WWW.OGRACING.COM
800.934.9112
703.430.3303
info@ogracing.com
Sparco's Largest Distributor for 28 Years
PFC Distributor for 27 Years
Pagid, Alpinestars, MOMO, OMP, Hawk, Bell, Aim, G-Force, HJC,
HANS, Arai, Simpson, Brey Krause, Longacre, CoolShirt!
Supplying Track Junkies for 34 Years.
PCA Club Racing - National Sponsor Since 1998
A Veteran Owned Business
Check out our blog!
#18
Rennlist Member
What we found was that with drip rails/gutters the air would go past the side window opening, with just a window net. When we covered the drip rail/gutter the air would come back and then turn the tufts 90 degrees into the car. Now if there was a side window in place that couldn't happen.
The air that was going over the car close to the door opening would become turbulent and the yarn tufts would be going in all directions. This then screwed up the air flow as it went back to the wing.
So one thing screwed up another thing and it just made others worse.
Bill
The air that was going over the car close to the door opening would become turbulent and the yarn tufts would be going in all directions. This then screwed up the air flow as it went back to the wing.
So one thing screwed up another thing and it just made others worse.
Bill
bottom line, what you found probably increased drag, or made the wing less effective, where you would need more angle which would cause more drag.....
Airflow study is interesting that way, because there are so many things to balance. also, its not intuitive, as you saw.. sometimes smoothing one thing out, makes the flow change that can actually cause more drag. the net net, with my point is that even by anyone's wildest imagination, you cant get 2-3mph at daytona by a small change like that. again, 0.5mph would be more accurate of a result using very standard values in the analysis. But, that's improving aero by 1-2%, and it sounds like the net results was a loss. Also, for that 2-3mph gain, (at 150-160mph/ 200-300hp/CD .35/Fr A =2, acc time to terminal speed =30sec) you would need a 10% drag coeff reduction and you aint getting that with a little rain gutter flap!