Aerobody Design Journal - MS16

Space to organize the design process for MS16.

This table includes any notable iterations made on the aerobody as well as the results given by CFD sims. (Naming conventions are arbitrary)

All CFD sims are ran with air velocity at 20 m/s.

The frontal area calculations are done using a section view of the car, and are only accurate if the shape curve has 1 local maximum (which it should). The results should then be seen as observations of the decrease in the Cd rather than observations of the Cd as a standalone value, due to the inaccuracy in measuring frontal area. Once the most aerodynamic iteration has been made (relative to the previous iterations), an accurate frontal area calculation will be done, resulting in a more accurate CD.

This being said, our final CFD values will not be representative of real life, so they are only used to analyze the aero performance relative to prior simulations.

Version	Description/Changes	Notes	Dimensions (LWH) (m)	Cd	CdA	Drag Force (N)

Version	Description/Changes	Notes	Dimensions (LWH) (m)	Cd	CdA	Drag Force (N)
MSXV (for reference)	Wide body (so that other subsystems would 100% fit) Rounded nose Curved bottom and top profiles		4.95 x 1.85 x 1.17 m Frontal Area 1.35m^2	0.11	0.1485	17.73
V15 (Liam)	Straight top/bottom profiles Rounded nose ~About 5.75 m^2 for solar array	Wheelbase length & max steering angle most likely will not comply with ASC 2026 regs (currently 2m and 12 degrees, will need to be around 2.4m and 15 degrees) for a 5.5m car. Need to make aero wider if this is the case, as we do not want dynamic wheel covers opening on small turns. Need to increase length to accommodate solar	5.5 x 1.35 x 1.13 m Frontal Area 0.98 m^2	0.13	0.1274	15.30
V16 (Liam)	Straight top/bottom profiles More aggressive, slightly pointed nose ~5.25 m^2 for solar array	Not enough room for solar, reduction in Cd and FA is minimal. Smaller frontal area = larger protruding canopy = more drag To avoid this, canopy needs to be as long as possible (L/h ratio should be around 5-6)	5.5 x 1.29 x 1.13 m Frontal Area 0.96 m^2	0.125	0.12	14.30
V17 (Liam)	Rounded top/bottom profiles Less aggressive nose ~5.25 m^2 for solar array Canopy comes to a point at the back instead of an edge	Still will need more room for solar, was just experimenting with changing the top/bottom profile shape	5.5 x 1.35 x 1.13 m Frontal Area 1.02 m^2	0.117	0.119	14.32
V18 (Liam)	Rounded top/bottom profiles ~5.25 m^2 for solar array Canopy comes to an edge at the back (less flow separation)	Not achieving significant enough reduction in Cd. Things to try: Making taper near the tail less aggressive (we still want to include the taper to save weight however there is too much flow separation atm.) Larger fillet between roof and canopy Longer canopy	5.5 x 1.35 x 1.17 m Frontal Area 1.05 m^2	0.116	0.122	14.52
V19 (Liam)	Proof of concept for drag reducing alterations ~5.10m^2 for solar array Longer canopy, removed taper at back (almost)	CFD inconclusive	5.5 x 1.35 x 1.17 m Frontal Area 1.05 m^2