Search Results

Nowadays, much focus for vehicle manufacturers is directed towards improving the energy efficiency of their products. The aerodynamic drag constitutes one major part of the total driving resistance for a vehicle travelling at higher speeds. In fact, above approximately 80km/h the aerodynamic drag is the dominating resistance acting on a truck. Hence the importance of reducing this resistance is apparent. Cooling drag is one part of the total aerodynamic drag, which arises from air flowing through the heat exchangers, and the irregular under-hood area. When using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) in the development process it is of great importance to ensure that the methods used are accurately capturing the physics of the flow. This paper deals with comparative studies between CFD and wind-tunnel tests. In this paper, two comparative studies are presented.

This investigation is a continuing analysis of the cooling performance and aerodynamic properties of a rear-mounted cooling module on a semi-generic commercial vehicle, which was carried out by Larsson, Löfdahl and Wiklund. In the previous study two designs of the cooling package installation were positioned behind the rear wheelhouse and the results were compared to a front-mounted cooling module. The investigation was mainly focused on a critical cooling situation occurring at lower vehicle speeds for a local distribution vehicle. The conclusion from the study was that the cooling performance for one of the rear-mounted installation was favorable compared to the front-mounted cooling package. This was mainly due to the low vehicle speed, the high fan speed and to fewer obstacles around the cooling module resulting in a lower system restriction within the installation.

The aim of the study was to investigate the cooling performance of two cooling package positions for distribution vehicles by using Computational Fluid Dynamics. The first cooling package was positioned in the front of the vehicle, behind the grill and the second position was at the rear of the vehicle. Each case was evaluated by its cooling performance for a critical driving situation and its aerodynamic drag at 90 km/h, where the largest challenge of an alternative position is the cooling air availability. The geometry used was a semi-generic commercial vehicle, based on a medium size distribution truck with a heat rejection value set to a fixed typical level at maximum power for a 13 litre Euro 6 diesel engine. The heat exchangers included in the study were the air conditioning condenser, the charge air cooler and the radiator. It was found that the main problem with the rear mounted cooling installation was the combination of the fan and the geometry after the fan.

This paper presents pressure drops and heat transfer rates for compact heat exchangers, where the heat exchangers are angled 90°, 60°, 30° and 10° relative to the incoming airflow. The investigation is based on three heat exchangers with thicknesses of 19mm and 52mm. Each heat exchanger was mounted in a duct, where it was tested for thermal and isothermal conditions. The inlet temperature of the coolant was defined to two temperatures; ambient temperature and 90°C. For the ambient cases the coolant had the same temperature as the surrounding air, these tests were performed for five airflow rates. When the coolant had a temperature of 90°C a combination of five coolant flow rates and five airflow rates were tested. The test set-up was defined as having a constant cross-section area for 90°, 60° and 30° angles, resulting in a larger core area and a lower airspeed through the core, for a more inclined heat exchanger.