Tool for visualizing aero vs rolling resistance - Page 2 - Fuelly Forums

Android Users - Coming Soon! - Migrating from aCar 4.8 to 5.0

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 03-18-2006, 08:16 PM   #11
Driving on E
 
Matt Timion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,110
Country: United States
Re:

Quote:
Originally Posted by MetroMPG
http://metrompg.com/tool-aero-rr.htm

i left out some of the fields that are constants. still need to add some form field / table column descriptions, credits & links.

feedback ?
Looks good to me. What was it written in? Java? Any chance you want to give me the source code so I can post it up here? Credit will be given, of course.
__________________

Matt Timion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2006, 06:16 AM   #12
Registered Member
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,223
Country: United States
it's coldfusion. i was

it's coldfusion. i was going to do a javascript version, but i'm faster with CF (though javascript would have had a portability advantage). i can zip the file and PM you a link to download it. you can translate it to php or whatever suits you.

but let's just wait for a bit of feedback first. no point in both of us revising the same code at the same time.

also, i should compare the formulas used against another set i've seen.
__________________

MetroMPG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2006, 06:18 AM   #13
Registered Member
 
krousdb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,480
Country: United States
Location: Raleigh, NC
Re:

Quote:
Originally Posted by MetroMPG
http://metrompg.com/tool-aero-rr.htm

i left out some of the fields that are constants. still need to add some form field / table column descriptions, credits & links.

feedback ?
If you are so inclined, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Density_of_air

FE increases as the density of air decreases which happens with increasing temperature, increasing humidity, increasing elevation and decreasing barometric pressure. I could have figured this out 15 years ago but my brain hurts when I look at it now. At least there is a table of density vs temp. You could try to fit a curve to it if you can't figure out the formula.
__________________


krousdb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2006, 04:27 PM   #14
Registered Member
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,223
Country: United States
Quote:If you are so

Quote:
If you are so inclined...
well, i was *partially* inclined.

i updated the tool with the table data from wikipedia, so you can select from a range of pre-calculated rho (air density) values based on various temperatures. the table doesn't specify the other values used in the rho calculations, but i suspect they used "standard" values for pressure & water vapour content (humidity).

http://metrompg.com/tool-aero-rr.htm

while roaming around the web reading about this, i came across a very interesting page which actually does the rho calculation (javascript) from input values of air temp, absolute pressure, and humidity.

most interestingly, it then takes that info and calculates *relative engine HP*.

since our cars' engine hp figures are calculated by SAE rules at standardized atmospheric conditions, this tool shows the effects on HP of different atmospheric conditions (as they affect density of the intake charge).

Quote:
For the SAE J1349 relative horsepower calculations, the standard reference conditions are: Air temp 77 deg F (25 deg C), 29.235 Inches- Hg (990 mb) actual pressure and 0% relative humidity.
http://wahiduddin.net/calc/calc_hp_abs.htm
MetroMPG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2006, 04:45 PM   #15
Registered Member
 
krousdb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,480
Country: United States
Location: Raleigh, NC
Nice, I suspect standard

Nice, I suspect standard pressure and humidity values also. The temp selection works just fine the way it is. I think you might want to mention that this calculator is primarily for calculating aero drag and rolling resistance. The MPG calc is subject to lots of speculation about how one calculates ICE efficiency. MPG figures should be taken with a grain of salt. I backed into a 26% efficiency based on the highway testing I did at 55 MPH. At 26% that is very high compared to the 13% figure that I have seen for modern ICEs. But maybe the 13% is for normal driving through a whole tank, not at a constant speed.
__________________


krousdb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2006, 05:29 PM   #16
Registered Member
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,223
Country: United States
agreed - it needs to be

agreed - it needs to be fleshed out with disclaimers, variable desrcriptions, links to relevant info & credits.

added one more feature: a quick select for summer / winter fuel energy densities.

note that the temperature calculation doesn't have an effect on rolling resistance, where in real life it would (tire rr decreases as temp increases). the temp calc on my page only affects aero drag.

i have a couple of other simple additions in mind. i'll do them tomorrow.
MetroMPG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2006, 05:39 PM   #17
Registered Member
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,223
Country: United States
one other thing i noticed in

one other thing i noticed in the spreadsheet formula: tire drag is unchanging at all speeds (vehicle mass * CRR * gravity constant), but doesn't rolling resistance increase with speed?

(EDIT: my mistake; the spreadsheed doesn't show this; see below.)

i was looking at other sites, and saw this formula for HP to overcome tire/mechanical drag. it's more precise, and varies with speed:

Quote:
HP= V/375 times[0.01184 W + 0.000353(V-66)W].

Velocity V is in miles per hour,Weight W is in pounds.If your speed
is below 66-mph,then the second term within the parenthesis falls
out.Again,to get flywheel power, take your result and divide by
0.95. This yields Bhp the engine or electric motor must provide to the
powertrain, at 95% mechanical efficiency for the powertrain.
it would be nice to have a way to play with head/tail winds on the page as well. it shouldn't be too hard to revise the formula. i'll think about that a bit tomorrow as well - unless someone wants to jump in before then
MetroMPG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2006, 02:33 AM   #18
Registered Member
 
krousdb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,480
Country: United States
Location: Raleigh, NC
Yes, rolling resistance

Yes, rolling resistance should increase with speed. Column U on the spreadsheet clearly shows that it does. The formula used was posted here by someone else and I cannot conform the tire resistance part. By all means, if you have found a better formula, you should use it.

Calculating the effect of a DIRECT headwind or tailwind would be easy, just add/subtract the windspeed to the aero part only. Calculating winds at other directions than 0 degrees and 180 degrees involves the side area of the vehicle and is much more complicated to do, if at all.
__________________


krousdb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2006, 06:30 AM   #19
Driving on E
 
Matt Timion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,110
Country: United States
Re: Yes, rolling resistance

Quote:
Originally Posted by krousdb
Calculating the effect of a DIRECT headwind or tailwind would be easy, just add/subtract the windspeed to the aero part only. Calculating winds at other directions than 0 degrees and 180 degrees involves the side area of the vehicle and is much more complicated to do, if at all.
ACtually this is very easy to do as well. All that we would be doing is solving for an unknown side of a triangle, which is pretty simple trigonometry.
Matt Timion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2006, 08:21 AM   #20
Registered Member
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,223
Country: United States
you're right krousdb. if

you're right krousdb. if you remove aero drag from the picture (by setting column M values to zero), you can see HP Tires continues to increase with speed. my bad.

when i compared the two different formulas for rolling drag, you get these figures:

MPH - HP TIRES (orig. formula) - HP TIRES (diff. formula)

05 - 0.261422561 - 0.398304667
10 - 0.522845122 - 0.796609333
15 - 0.784267683 - 1.194914
20 - 1.045690244 - 1.593218667
25 - 1.307112805 - 1.991523333
30 - 1.568535366 - 2.389828
35 - 1.829957927 - 2.788132667
40 - 2.091380489 - 3.186437333
45 - 2.352803050 - 3.584742
50 - 2.614225611 - 3.983046667
55 - 2.875648172 - 4.381351333
60 - 3.137070733 - 4.779656
65 - 3.398493294 - 5.177960667

the difference is consistent: 52% more drag in the 2nd formula at all speeds. maybe it reflects the difference between LRR tires and non-LRR tires.

if you want, you can enter a column with the new formula in Row 2: =A2/375*(0.01184*B2 + 0.000353*B2)

(it applies only up to 65 mph. for some reason, rolling resistance as calculated in the second formula is set to increase above 66 mph. i'll see if i can find out more about it.)
__________________

MetroMPG is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Graphs itsastationwagon Fuelly Web Support and Community News 2 08-13-2008 03:04 PM
Both odometer and trip mileage? tiffehr Fuelly Web Support and Community News 1 08-08-2008 05:55 AM
195* Tstat SVOboy Experiments, Modifications and DIY 12 04-17-2007 08:27 AM
What's the point of living anymore??? (personal stuff- If you don't like reading personal stuff then don't open the thread) Compaq888 General Discussion (Off-Topic) 38 04-03-2006 11:30 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.