Teardop aerodynamics

General Discussion about almost anything Teardrop or camping related

Re: Teardop aerodynamics

Postby working on it » Sun Oct 26, 2014 2:04 pm

Martiangod wrote:I know I'm not a TD but am a TTT, just posted from my observance,
i'm starting to think the 45 degree cut on the front is the biggest culprit and
that a blunt nose would have been better.
I've got a TTT also, not aero in the wildest stretch of the imagination, but designed as the result of logical (to me) compromises. Choosing the 45 degree angle nose was the first such choice. I originally designed the TTT to be as simple to lay-out and cut (and bolt, glue, and screw together) as I could get it, but still be vaguely a TD/TTT variant. The angle of the front slope on the nose is a compromise of three wishes: airflow, inside storage, and reflectivity. The height of the bottom edge of the angle is < height of the wing on my wife's Cobalt (one of the intended TVs, the other an HHR). The 45 degree slope gives the air somewhere to flow when it hits the flat surface of the trailer. The amount of lost space inside the trailer cabin would be less than if a steeper angle were chosen, and the 45 degree angle is the maximum angle compromise for shedding sunlight/heat (reflective paint was always a design imperative). The square edges of the plywood structure are wind catchers; I always intended to attach half-round to smooth the flow, but as I am towing with a large truck instead, it can wait. Then there is the un-curved rear of the trailer. I wanted to put a Kammback on it, but after I lengthened the original frame by 24" to house my generator, I realized that the intended Grasshopper shape, with a Kammback, would have to be another 12-18" longer. So, I just hung a vertical hatch there instead. Compromised again. Airflow at the rear of the box structure is only helped (at this time) by the rough-surfaced hatch opening cover, made of industrial conveyor belting with a bedliner coating. I chose this because I wanted it to break up the vortex at the rear of the trailer, which might actually somewhat reduce the suction, or at least reduce the amount of dirt/dust build-up on the rear (my HHR has no such addition, it's like having dirt magnet at the rear window; my family had a wagon with a flow deflector there, it had no dirt build up). Too many compromises, too many "must-haves" in my build. The 4x8 size trailer cut from 4x8 sheets of plywood is inherently limiting to aerodynamics, since H vs W vs L is not in the proper proportions for ideal streamlining. Ideal for aerodynamic camping: Summers Bros. "Goldenrod" with a cd of .117; take along a sleeping bag!
Goldenrod.png
Goldenrod.png (48.05 KiB) Viewed 730 times
2013 HHRv "squareback/squaredrop", rugged, 4x8 TTT, 2225 lbs
  • *3500 lb Dexter EZ-Lube braked axle, 3000 lb.springs, active-progressive bumpstop suspension
  • *27 x 8.5-14LT AT tires (x 3) *Weight Distribution system for single-beam tongue
  • *100% LED's & GFCI outlets, 3x fans, AM/FM/CD/Aux. *A/C & heat, Optima AGM, inverter & charger(s)
  • *extended-run, on-board, 2500w generator *Coleman dual-fuel stove & lantern, Ikea grill, vintage skillet
  • *zinc/stainless front & side racks *98"L x 6" diameter rod & reel carrier tube on roof
173193172890148599
User avatar
working on it
2000 Club
2000 Club
 
Posts: 2189
Images: 457
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 9:05 pm
Location: DFW Texas

Re: Teardop aerodynamics

Postby LandCommander » Mon Oct 27, 2014 1:35 am

ChasCABQ, I think that is a beautiful profile. Aerodynamically, I thin it's actually better to not have a curve on the rear, trailing edge. A rounded front and sharp edge on the back would be ideal, this allows for clean detachment of airflow at the back of the trailer.

The 11 degrees is kind of a "safe" number I'd say. With the proper compound curves, it can actually approach 13 degrees or more. There is a "template" that ecomodders use that defines this curve. I read that without any curving (ie. a sharp angle) the air flow will stay attached with a 10 degree or less slope. So with a little bit of a curve, I figure 11 degrees is a safe number.
LandCommander
Teardrop Builder
 
Posts: 43
Images: 22
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 3:47 pm

Re: Teardop aerodynamics

Postby LandCommander » Mon Oct 27, 2014 1:43 am

Chris, that is definitely a surprise with the big trailer vs little trailer mpg.
I think the curved leading edges will help, I must point out however, that there may be a fee other variables at play here, you mentioned 65mph in on and 60-65mph in the other, that could be a mpg right there. The tire drag could be something too. The biggest gain may be from the box being closer to the tow vehicle. Which, depending on the tow vehicle, the 45 degree slope could actually be icreasing the size of the gap. This goes to show that the fact that it's being towed does change the rules a little bit, because otherwise the sloped front would certainly be more aero
LandCommander
Teardrop Builder
 
Posts: 43
Images: 22
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 3:47 pm
Top

Re: Teardop aerodynamics

Postby IamJerryP » Mon Oct 27, 2014 9:00 am

After years in the homebuilt aircraft arena, The need for slick aerodynamics does not come into play until you get a little over 50mph.
Air resistance, drag, and the power needed to overcome it rise dramatically after that..
Which is why you can drag almost anything around up to around 50 mph.
long sloping curves, keeping the air flowing along the surface is very important, and how the air exits is very important.

Look at wing shapes.. rounded surfaces pull the air over faster, and better than flat.
IamJerryP
Teardrop Builder
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2014 3:42 am
Top

Re: Teardop aerodynamics

Postby Redneck Teepee » Mon Oct 27, 2014 9:44 am

IamJerryP wrote:After years in the homebuilt aircraft arena, The need for slick aerodynamics does not come into play until you get a little over 50mph.
Air resistance, drag, and the power needed to overcome it rise dramatically after that..
Which is why you can drag almost anything around up to around 50 mph.
long sloping curves, keeping the air flowing along the surface is very important, and how the air exits is very important.

Look at wing shapes.. rounded surfaces pull the air over faster, and better than flat.



A life long buddy of mine also lives and breath's "Home Built Aircraft", his first was a side X side RV-6 for which he won numerous awards at Oshkosh and the second which I paid a little closer attention to during it's construction was a "Harmon Rocket", for which he has also won numerous awards, including the "Craftsmanship" award at Oshkosh.

First off I believe this guy could build a space shuttle all by himself, he is that talented and bright, second he did a bunch of speed modifications to the rocket after it was up and flying to gain about 50 mph in cruising/top speeds. Just little stuff around the wheel's and cowl engine air intake's etc, produced this gain. Motto: "A whole bunch of peanut's makes an elephant fat"

I think the little stuff will and does produce, as long as the problem area's are properly identified and then applied/constructed properly. I also realize we are talking teardrops vs airplanes but it is all aerodynamic's.


Image

Image
I fear the day that technology will surpass our human interaction, the world will have a generation of idiot's.
User avatar
Redneck Teepee
Silver Donating Member
 
Posts: 853
Images: 21
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 5:00 pm
Location: Central Ca.
Top

Re: Teardop aerodynamics

Postby ChasCABQ » Tue Oct 28, 2014 10:09 am

LandCommander wrote:Aerodynamically, I think it's actually better to not have a curve on the rear, trailing edge. A rounded front and sharp edge on the back would be ideal, this allows for clean detachment of airflow at the back of the trailer.

Thanks for the info. My profile is based on using 1/8" plywood for roof and hatch so I first thought to keep 20" min. radius at back to avoid another joint. I may reconsider and put sharp edge then cover it with epoxied fiberglass like I plan for all other exterior joints. I wonder about the hurricane hinge effect on airflow and whether a sharp edge will make a difference?
Build journal: http://www.tnttt.com/viewtopic.php?t=61303
In 2016, I received a kidney transplant, finished my teardrop, and took it on the road! In 2017 I sold it and am back to car camping.
Thanks to all forum members who provided advice about my build and posted info to help me get started.
User avatar
ChasCABQ
Donating Member
 
Posts: 95
Images: 18
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2014 3:54 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Top

Re: Teardop aerodynamics

Postby GPW » Tue Oct 28, 2014 10:53 am

Quote: “ "A whole bunch of peanut's makes an elephant fat” “ .... therefore, it takes a lot to show much of a difference too ...  No matter what you do there is only so much Drag you can eliminate ... Some you just have to live with ... best way of reducing drag is Slowing down ... ;)
I always thought this was pretty streamlined with it’s faired in wheel pants ... http://tnttt.com/gallery/image.php?image_id=93611
There’s no place like Foam !
User avatar
GPW
Gold Donating Member
 
Posts: 14920
Images: 546
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 7:58 pm
Location: New Orleans
Top

Re: Teardop aerodynamics

Postby Redneck Teepee » Tue Oct 28, 2014 11:57 am

GPW wrote:Quote: “ "A whole bunch of peanut's makes an elephant fat” “ .... therefore, it takes a lot to show much of a difference too ...  No matter what you do there is only so much Drag you can eliminate ... Some you just have to live with ... best way of reducing drag is Slowing down ... ;)
I always thought this was pretty streamlined with it’s faired in wheel pants ... http://tnttt.com/gallery/image.php?image_id=93611




Agree 100%.....I pull at 55 mph on cruise control (if available on my TV), I'm in no hurry to get there, sit back and enjoy the scenery. The TV also is breaking the vast majority of resistance up and over the teardrop and when I need more fuel I just stop and get it. I think a teardrop is the last thing you want to sink money into to gain a little less resistance for the amount of actual pulled miles a year, when it's parked and set up is when you are supposed to be enjoying it. :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
I fear the day that technology will surpass our human interaction, the world will have a generation of idiot's.
User avatar
Redneck Teepee
Silver Donating Member
 
Posts: 853
Images: 21
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 5:00 pm
Location: Central Ca.
Top

Re: Teardop aerodynamics

Postby LandCommander » Tue Oct 28, 2014 1:00 pm

That's a very cool plane, amazing he was able to squeeze an extra 50 mph out of it!
GPW, that trailer looks pretty darn aero, even though the rear slope isn't ideal, the tire spats/deflectors and wheel skirt look nice and should work well.

I also agree that slowing down is the best drag reducer.
LandCommander
Teardrop Builder
 
Posts: 43
Images: 22
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 3:47 pm
Top

Re: Teardop aerodynamics

Postby ChasCABQ » Wed Oct 29, 2014 12:21 pm

After browsing this discussion and looking at ecomodders, etc. I've revised my design to be more aerodynamic at the expense of not looking like traditional teardrop. I used a slight (about 5 degree) slope on roof with a flatback and recessed vertical hatch. This has several advantages: more room inside, easier hatch build, hatch hinge and side seals will be out of the wind stream reducing water infiltration. Disadvantage is that galley access will be more restricted due to headroom. I could install double barn doors to eliminate headroom issue and simplify build. This sketch doesn't show all hatch details, just general profile.

I'd love to hear from you experienced builders out there, thanks.
Teardrop flatback.jpg
Teardrop flatback.jpg (84.96 KiB) Viewed 556 times
Build journal: http://www.tnttt.com/viewtopic.php?t=61303
In 2016, I received a kidney transplant, finished my teardrop, and took it on the road! In 2017 I sold it and am back to car camping.
Thanks to all forum members who provided advice about my build and posted info to help me get started.
User avatar
ChasCABQ
Donating Member
 
Posts: 95
Images: 18
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2014 3:54 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Top

Re: Teardop aerodynamics

Postby tony.latham » Wed Oct 29, 2014 2:22 pm

The large flat back of your trailer is going to be horrible for drag in my lay opinion. Take a look at these images of the affect of drag on different shapes:

https://www.google.com/search?q=drag+sh ... 24&bih=507

You may agree that the shape of an object's rear is extremely important in reducing drag. With a teardrop, one could hypothesize that since it's behind a tow vehicle, the rear is the most important part.

Tony
User avatar
tony.latham
Gold Donating Member
 
Posts: 7077
Images: 17
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 4:03 pm
Location: Middle of Idaho on the edge of nowhere
Top

Re: Teardop aerodynamics

Postby Vedette » Wed Oct 29, 2014 2:33 pm

Just another peanut!
But, my new project "Kermit" will have very slippery fender skirts! :thinking:
Even if it just amounts to one extra bottle of Red on a long trip??? :wine:
Good Roads
Brian & Sandi
Good Roads
Brian & Sandi
Here is a link to my Build Journal
viewtopic.php?f=50&t=50912
Image109106109111109110138766
User avatar
Vedette
Silver Donating Member
 
Posts: 5141
Images: 443
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 4:28 am
Location: Westbank B.C.
Top

Re: Teardop aerodynamics

Postby ChasCABQ » Wed Oct 29, 2014 3:41 pm

tony.latham wrote:The large flat back of your trailer is going to be horrible for drag in my lay opinion. Take a look at these images of the affect of drag on different shapes:

https://www.google.com/search?q=drag+sh ... 24&bih=507

Tony

Thanks for your opinion and the link. Everyone who's replied has helped me refine my design.

I agree that a true teardrop would have the least drag particularly with the shape oriented in plan versus profile BUT it would end up longer and harder to build than what I would like. I reviewed aerodynamic websites and car designs to decide that flat back is best for my skill level not to mention increased space and hatch simplicity. See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kammback which notes the improved aerodynamics and constructibility of a flat or Kamm back. I plan to include a recessed galley hatch so the sides and top extend past the hatch a few inches with a sharp edge for a cleaner break in the airflow. FYI my TV is an Outback with similar cross-sectional area and height.

Check out the rear end of Corvettes, Tesla model S and Toyota Prius which use a flat back at the trunk. Also one of the links you referenced had a chart showing that a bullet shape is not bad at all http://www.cervelo.com//Media/images/Aero---Shapes-and-relative-drag-05dc9844-8960-4f76-93ad-4d5305ce5262-1-630x362.JPG
Last edited by ChasCABQ on Wed Oct 29, 2014 5:52 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Build journal: http://www.tnttt.com/viewtopic.php?t=61303
In 2016, I received a kidney transplant, finished my teardrop, and took it on the road! In 2017 I sold it and am back to car camping.
Thanks to all forum members who provided advice about my build and posted info to help me get started.
User avatar
ChasCABQ
Donating Member
 
Posts: 95
Images: 18
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2014 3:54 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Top

Re: Teardop aerodynamics

Postby gudmund » Wed Oct 29, 2014 3:50 pm

Brian, as much room as I see inside the rear fenders of "Kermit" from the photo's you sent, you should be able to build quite the storage area's inside the fenders for the "RED supply" needed for the road trips!!!!! (the color picks for Kermit sound like they will work fine and with the aero shape and a good wax job, Kermit should stay cleaner than Miss Piggy at travel speeds!!)
gudmund
1000 Club
1000 Club
 
Posts: 1015
Images: 39
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 3:58 pm
Location: Camano Island, WN
Top

Re: Teardop aerodynamics

Postby tony.latham » Wed Oct 29, 2014 6:49 pm

ChasCABQ wrote:
tony.latham wrote:The large flat back of your trailer is going to be horrible for drag in my lay opinion. Take a look at these images of the affect of drag on different shapes:

https://www.google.com/search?q=drag+sh ... 24&bih=507

Tony

Thanks for your opinion and the link. Everyone who's replied has helped me refine my design.

I agree that a true teardrop would have the least drag particularly with the shape oriented in plan versus profile BUT it would end up longer and harder to build than what I would like. I reviewed aerodynamic websites and car designs to decide that flat back is best for my skill level not to mention increased space and hatch simplicity. See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kammback which notes the improved aerodynamics and constructibility of a flat or Kamm back. I plan to include a recessed galley hatch so the sides and top extend past the hatch a few inches with a sharp edge for a cleaner break in the airflow. FYI my TV is an Outback with similar cross-sectional area and height.

Check out the rear end of Corvettes, Tesla model S and Toyota Prius which use a flat back at the trunk. Also one of the links you referenced had a chart showing that a bullet shape is not bad at all http://www.cervelo.com//Media/images/Aero---Shapes-and-relative-drag-05dc9844-8960-4f76-93ad-4d5305ce5262-1-630x362.JPG


Thanks for the education on the Kamback. I wasn't aware of that funciton, but have sure seen it on the 'vettes etc.

The one thing that has helped me the most -other than this forum- for building, was purchasing a copy of Steve Fredrick's Build Manual. Lots of discussion on the forum about it.

Tony
User avatar
tony.latham
Gold Donating Member
 
Posts: 7077
Images: 17
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 4:03 pm
Location: Middle of Idaho on the edge of nowhere
Top

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron