16.2 RESULTS
With the analyses complete, it seemed sensible to once again examine the drag readings obtained (Table 2).
Velocity (mph)
|
Drag (N)
|
Drag Reduction (%)
|
Original Design
|
Optimization II
|
10
|
0.383
|
0.379
|
1.08361101
|
20
|
1.360
|
1.271
|
6.566291639
|
30
|
2.816
|
2.630
|
6.598306222
|
40
|
4.790
|
4.458
|
6.93378089
|
50
|
7.276
|
6.764
|
7.035519126
|
60
|
10.293
|
9.555
|
7.171114054
|
Table 2 - Optimization (ii) Results
As can be seen from the readings, the second optimization attempt resulted in a further decrease in the wing mirror drag, with an average reduction of just under 7% at speeds of 20mph and upwards (compared to the original geometry). This reduction in drag is most likely resultant from the general streamlining of the wing mirror shape in the efforts to reduce the sharp angles in surface curvature. Plotting the contours of static pressure on the wing mirror’s underside shows that the smoothing of this area resulted in a significant decrease in static pressure due to the reduction of flow stagnation (Figure 18).
Share with your friends: |
