Search Results

Modern aerodynamic Class 8 freight tractors can improve vehicle freight efficiency and fuel economy versus older traditional style tractors when pulling Canadian style A- or B-Train double trailer long combination vehicles (LCV's) at highway speeds. This paper compares the aerodynamic performance of a current generation aerodynamic tractor with several freight hauling configurations through computational fluid dynamics evaluations using the Lattice-Boltzmann methodology. The configurations investigated include the tractor hauling a standard 53′ trailer, a platooning configuration with a 30′ separation distance, and an A-Train configuration including two 48′ trailers connected with a dolly converter. The study demonstrates CFD's capability of evaluating extremely long vehicle combinations that might be difficult to accomplish in traditional wind tunnels due to size limitations.

The increasing importance of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the ongoing evolution of vehicle-to-vehicle connectivity technologies have generated significant interest in platooning for commercial vehicles, where two or more vehicles travel in same traffic lane in relatively close proximity. This paper examines the effect of platooning on four increasingly aerodynamic tractor-trailer configurations, using a Lattice Boltzmann based CFD solver. Each platoon consisted of three identical tractor-trailer configurations traveling in the same lane at 65mph. Two different vehicle to vehicle gaps were studied, 5m and 9m, in addition to singleton (solitary) vehicles, representing an effectively infinite gap. Aerodynamic drag for the lead, middle, and trailing vehicle in the platooning configurations were compared to the corresponding single vehicle tractor-trailer configuration.

Recent regulations on greenhouse gas (GHG) emission standards for heavy-duty vehicles have prompted government agencies to standardize procedures assessing the aerodynamic performance of Class 8 tractor-trailers. The coastdown test procedure is the primary reference method employed to assess vehicle drag currently, while other valid alternatives include constant speed testing, computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations, and wind tunnel testing. The main purpose of this paper is to compare CFD simulations with a corresponding 1/8th scale wind tunnel test. Additionally, this paper will highlight the impacts of wind tunnel testing on the total drag coefficient performance as compared to full scale open road analysis with and without real world, upstream turbulence wind conditions. All scale model testing and CFD simulations were performed on a class 8 tractor with a standard 53-foot dry-box trailer. The wind tunnel testing was performed in the Auto Research Center (ARC) wind tunnel.

The primary purpose of this paper is to correlate the CFD simulations performed using PowerFLOW, a Lattice Boltzmann based method, and wind tunnel tests performed at a wind tunnel facility on 1/8th scaled tractor-trailer models. The correlations include results using an aerodynamic-type tractor paired with several trailer configurations, including a baseline trailer without any aerodynamic devices as well as combinations of trailer side skirts and a tractor-trailer gap flow management device. CFD simulations were performed in a low blockage open road environment at full scale Reynolds number to understand how the different test environments impact total aerodynamic drag values and performance deltas between trailer aerodynamic devices. There are very limited studies with the Class-8 sleeper tractor and 53ft long trailer comparing wind tunnel test and CFD simulation with and without trailer aerodynamic device. This paper is to fill this gap.

Build variation and tolerance stack up are unavoidable in the vehicle manufacturing process, not only for individual components and assemblies but also for the vehicle at large. Deviations across several components, each within tolerance limits, could ultimately have a significant effect on vehicle aerodynamic performance. The objective of this study is to quantify the impact of several such build variations on vehicle drag. A Lattice-Boltzmann-based simulation method was used in conjunction with design of experiments to construct a Kriging response surface interpolation model to efficiently characterize the impact of 17 different body and chassis build variations on the aerodynamic drag of a VNL 780 tractor trailer at a nonzero yaw angle. The top three parameters with greatest aerodynamic impact were then evaluated at the opposite symmetric yaw angle to understand the impact of build variation on vehicle asymmetry.

Comparison of computation fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis of physical testing on curved test tracks highlights that simplifications in both methods can lead to significant error in predicting real world fuel economy performance for heavy duty tractor/trailer vehicles. The importance of understanding the differences in and the accuracy of these test methods have increased recently due to North American greenhouse gas (GHG) regulations and similar developments in other regions requiring manufacturers to assess aerodynamic performance of nearly every tractor sold. This paper discusses lessons learned in enhancing the accuracy of CFD and track predictions of real world aero performance by quantifying the effects of test track curves and challenging simplifying assumptions.

Fuel efficiency for tractor/trailer combinations continues to be a key area of focus for manufacturers and suppliers in the commercial vehicle industry. Improved fuel economy of vehicles in transit can be achieved through reductions in aerodynamic drag, tire rolling resistance, and driveline losses. Fuel economy can also be increased by improving the efficiency of the thermal to mechanical energy conversion of the engine. One specific approach to improving the thermal efficiency of the engine is to implement a waste heat recovery (WHR) system that captures engine exhaust heat and converts this heat into useful mechanical power through use of a power fluid turbine expander. Several heat exchangers are required for this Rankine-based WHR system to collect and reject the waste heat before and after the turbine expander. The WHR condenser, which is the heat rejection component of this system, can be an additional part of the front-end cooling module.