Scientific research of TF rear wings
Discussion
I found this on the net :
[i]Development of the dragster model proved beneficial in understanding
how the aerodynamic characteristics affect the performance of the dragster.
This model allows us to understand the questions of how much down force is needed
and how changing these aerodynamic characteristics will truly effect the performance of the dragster.
Development of these elapsed time versus speed curves for various lift and drag coefficients
allows us to determine a trend as to how these aerodynamic characteristics can improve performance.
It was always said that these dragsters want as much down force as possible
but from this model it is not necessarily true.
What was shown to be the most beneficial is the reduction of the drag
and the reduction of the coefficient of lift up to a certain point.
The current wings used on top-fuel dragsters produce an enormous amount
of down force and along with this comes an enormous amount of induced drag.
Designing a wing that will take advantage of the knowledge gained from this model
proved to increase the top speed but more importantly reduce the elapsed
time which is how you win races.[/i]
The whole text is from 2000 from someone applying for a degree "Master of Science" whatever this means,
is quite dry and very theoretical but has some interesting statistics and figures not only for TF.
http://gisceu.net/PDF/U480.pdf
Are there any more things like that on the net ?
[i]Development of the dragster model proved beneficial in understanding
how the aerodynamic characteristics affect the performance of the dragster.
This model allows us to understand the questions of how much down force is needed
and how changing these aerodynamic characteristics will truly effect the performance of the dragster.
Development of these elapsed time versus speed curves for various lift and drag coefficients
allows us to determine a trend as to how these aerodynamic characteristics can improve performance.
It was always said that these dragsters want as much down force as possible
but from this model it is not necessarily true.
What was shown to be the most beneficial is the reduction of the drag
and the reduction of the coefficient of lift up to a certain point.
The current wings used on top-fuel dragsters produce an enormous amount
of down force and along with this comes an enormous amount of induced drag.
Designing a wing that will take advantage of the knowledge gained from this model
proved to increase the top speed but more importantly reduce the elapsed
time which is how you win races.[/i]
The whole text is from 2000 from someone applying for a degree "Master of Science" whatever this means,
is quite dry and very theoretical but has some interesting statistics and figures not only for TF.
http://gisceu.net/PDF/U480.pdf
Are there any more things like that on the net ?
Edited by Benni on Monday 1st November 01:23
I hope he got marked down for his appalling abuse of apostrophes.
Interesting stuff though, I especially liked '...Because Top-Fuel Dragsters accelerate at over 4 longitudinal g's for several seconds, this means that there is an effective tire friction factor of over 4 [Hallum, 1994]. This is not possible...'
Top Fuel cars are a bit like comedy, or puppies: They don't stand up to being over-analysed or disected too much...
Interesting stuff though, I especially liked '...Because Top-Fuel Dragsters accelerate at over 4 longitudinal g's for several seconds, this means that there is an effective tire friction factor of over 4 [Hallum, 1994]. This is not possible...'
Top Fuel cars are a bit like comedy, or puppies: They don't stand up to being over-analysed or disected too much...
WJM said:
I seem to remember on that Tommorow's World programme involving Dennis Priddle that the "experts" view was that the wing was not required and they built a car with none plus an enclosed cabin. They also stiffened up the chassis. Mind you it didn't work !
Bill
I have this on video, bunch of muppets. Turned it into a rigid dog turd. Didn't handle quite right...Bill
Of course, that doesn't mean they were wrong. What's needed is downforce, and if that can be generated from shaped bodywork, then the wing won't be necessary. I always thought that with a bit more development, wedge dragsters should have made more impact. Yes, I think they're ugly, and I like my dragsters with the huge rear wings that we have now, but I don't necessarily think they're the best solution to the problem.
As for chassis rigidity, the rules have been flip-flopping on that for years. requiring extra bracing the make them more rigid one year, and requiring them to be cut out to add more flex the next. I don't think there's any firm consensus on what the optimum rigidity is. Indeed, is it dependent on what you do with the car? Are chassis requirements for a car running 125 hard passes a year on the NHRA tour necessarily the same as for a car running 20 passes in Europe?
As for chassis rigidity, the rules have been flip-flopping on that for years. requiring extra bracing the make them more rigid one year, and requiring them to be cut out to add more flex the next. I don't think there's any firm consensus on what the optimum rigidity is. Indeed, is it dependent on what you do with the car? Are chassis requirements for a car running 125 hard passes a year on the NHRA tour necessarily the same as for a car running 20 passes in Europe?
Gassing Station | Drag Racing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff