I apologize for this taking so long; we've been slammed with orders and new product development. In the below post I have detailed out our informative packet basically; so that you don't need to go to our website to read it. There is still some data missing that we include in the info packet though but this is a nice synapsis overall and picture heavy
.
We have two sets of data: the wing in freestream airflow and then the wing on the car. We then validated our CFD through a few means which is the final part of the thread post.
Wing in freestream airflow
Why do we publish free stream data on the wing when the performance of the wing changes on your FT86?
By publishing this data, you can compare our data directly with other wings on the market who publish data. This will allow direct comparison of drag, downforce, and efficiency for the consumer to make the most informed decision possible. We take every effort to ensure accuracy when performing CFD analysis. Please be sure competitors are competent and using a proper software as well for accurate comparisons.
Downforce
Drag
Efficiency
Wing on car
Why do we publish data of the Low Drag Wing on the FT86 when this is not common in the industry?
By publishing the data of the wing on the FT86, the customer will understand exactly how the wing will perform on their car. This is not common in this industry because it is very time consuming and involves a large amount of work. However, we feel it is the best way to present the data as it allows end users to understand what is happening with the vehicle.
The below numbers are the results from what the wing generates on the car and only the wing. This was to show that performance was minimally impacted by our placement and upright design.
Downforce
Drag
Efficiency
CFD Validation
All the computational fluid dynamics used at Verus Engineering is completed using ANSYS Fluent. Fluent is considered to be the best commercial CFD software on the market and is used by many in the top-tier of motorsports including Red Bull F1. On every analysis, we ensure a proper mesh is created for the required results, proper boundary conditions, and proper turbulence models are used.
To further validate that our CFD is set up properly, we performed actual part testing on the car as well.
1) Strain gauges were placed on the wing uprights to measure downforce and drag forces.
2) Coast down testing was used to measure changes in drag
Strain Gauge Testing
Strain gauges are used to measure the strain of a component, this data can then be calculated into forces. Strain gauges were used to measure the forces of the wing attached to the upright. This data was then compared to the simulation results generated by CFD and FEA. The real world experimental values correlated with the CFD well.
Coast Down Testing
We followed the SAE standard of coast down testing as close as we could. We coasted down from 100mph to around 10mph with 3 different cases; no wing, wing at 0 deg, and wing at 12 deg. The data was recorded using an AIM data logger and 2 runs were done and then averaged. Elevation changes were ignored because it could not be accurately calculated. Runs were made on the same day, at the same location, back to back.
From the coast down testing data, calculation of the coefficient of drag (cd) was completed. From this, the ability to compare simulated CFD drag to coast down testing drag was possible.
I'm sure there will be questions, so please just ask below and we'll answer as quickly as we can!
Thanks,
Eric