-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
The black car in the background is not clay. It is a machined aerodynamic "buck" that was later used for some styling experiments. We still have that buck as a museum piece. We did build a clay model in the UK, and that model was indeed destroyed. Perhaps one day I will post pictures of its destruction 
The black car in the background is not clay. It is a machined aerodynamic "buck" that was later used for some styling experiments. We still have that buck as a museum piece. We did build a clay model in the UK, and that model was indeed destroyed. Perhaps one day I will post pictures of its destruction
Thanks, Martin...
I updated the comment on the photo in this topic.
Your MPG talk slides (page 62) do show a sledgehammer job on the (silver) clay model in Aug 2006.
So it must be the "buck" ("museum piece") that showed up at Burning Man?
Last edited:
Nope, just the one reference on the Flickr photo.
My guess is that there is/was a "buck factory" in Norway, and they did the aero testing at a wind tunnel in Europe (perhaps the MIRA one in the UK). Apparently the buck was shipped back to the USA as a "conversation piece" as (from what I can tell) it had already served its' purpose.
My guess is that there is/was a "buck factory" in Norway, and they did the aero testing at a wind tunnel in Europe (perhaps the MIRA one in the UK). Apparently the buck was shipped back to the USA as a "conversation piece" as (from what I can tell) it had already served its' purpose.
Hmm... I've been using FLUENT 6.3 for a little while now, and I'm pretty familiar with the interface - It puzzles me that the above image has apparently been plotted as a graph of "Contours of Velocity Magnitude", when velocity magnitude graphs are used to describe fluid flow fields, rather than surface contours.
You see, the following is a graph of the velocity magnitude contours of a fluid flow field around a rudimentary circuit board represented as a box attached to a plane; the colors you see are plotted on a plane slicing through the fluid, and are correspondent with the velocities of the channels of fluid flowing around the box:
But the image you posted was apparently a graph of the velocity magnitude contours of the actual surface of the car, which makes no sense to me. Plotting the surface of a car according to its velocity would yield an image like this:
Because it's not the surface that's moving [that has velocity], it's the fluid around the surface which does, and thus can be plotted. I don't see how the image you posted was a plot of the contours of velocity magnitude of the surface of the car itself, as it appears to be, and I WOULD PAY GOOD MONEY for someone to explain to me what's going on here.
Seriously, if the aerodynamicist / computational fluid dynamicist of the Tesla Roadster does indeed participate in these forums, or can be reached via email or any other method, I would be extremely appreciative to ask him/her about this image.
Doug, if you have any idea how I might be able to find out more about this image, or if you know how to reach maybe one of the technical directors of the Tesla team I would wash your dishes & shine your shoes for a month. :smile:
Ehh... my fluid dynamics is a bit rusty...
I might be misunderstanding you, but I don't see why the velocity magnitude contours have to be restricted to a plane. Can't you plot them on an arbitrary 2D surface existing in 3 space? Yes, the surface of the car isn't moving, and classically the flow directly next to the surface is zero. But shouldn't you be able to define a new surface a small distance, say a few millimeters, from the skin of the car and then plot your contours there?
At any rate, I don't know the guys at Tesla that work on this stuff. Your best bet would be to contact Fluent, since they should have aero experts able to support their software. Or perhaps even MIRA since they're the guys that likely produced the image.
.
I might be misunderstanding you, but I don't see why the velocity magnitude contours have to be restricted to a plane. Can't you plot them on an arbitrary 2D surface existing in 3 space? Yes, the surface of the car isn't moving, and classically the flow directly next to the surface is zero. But shouldn't you be able to define a new surface a small distance, say a few millimeters, from the skin of the car and then plot your contours there?
At any rate, I don't know the guys at Tesla that work on this stuff. Your best bet would be to contact Fluent, since they should have aero experts able to support their software. Or perhaps even MIRA since they're the guys that likely produced the image.
.
Last edited:
Doug's right.
I think that if you do a plot of the true surface of the car then, as you would expect, the air in contact with the car body will be stationary and should be shown in blue.
I think the image of the Tesla is made by calculating the air flow at a fixed distance above/away from the true surface of the vehicle. I think this is why the struts supporting the wing mirrors look a bit too chunky and why the windscreen wiper has been ignored. Presumably the aim is to try to keep the air moving as fast as possible over the vehicle.
Since 30 m/s is about 108 km/hr or 68 mph does anyone know if the airflow over the wheels calculated with rotating or stationary wheels?
Similar threads
