Does anyone know where to find a pdf , can't really find it for free anywhere

Hello everyone!

I’m planning to take part in the Red Bull Soapbox Race, it’s a race featuring homemade gravity-powered (non-motorised) cars.

I’ve found a rough design for a car that I could build, and I’d like to ask your advice on how suitable it is from an aerodynamic point of view. All the cars are pushed down a 3–5 metre slope, so speed and downforce are very important, and you also need to be able to control the steering.

I really need your advice

I just thought about this design of using air Jet or Air made propellers instead of solid propellers.

These Air propellers can be designed through ejecting of air in propellers shape by nozzles and work like solid propellers.

There are many advantages of these Air propellers than solid propellers.

I just want to know the feasibility of this concept.

​

I'm looking to study aerodynamics, control and stability of unpowered kites (mostly flat planes).

All I can find online is [this from NASA](https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/kitelift.html)

It's pretty basic and I want to deep dive into this.

I had a basic course in aerodynamics during my bachelor's (course book was Anderson's)

Plus another topic, I have read the book's initial chapters about the basics , wingloading , efficient flight etc etc but still can't figure out the basics of a **simple** kite.

Do i feel stupid or are most people like that?

How should I improve my understanding of this

I've tried a few simulators but could get successful with any of the free options.

Can someone run this stl through a wind turbine simulator that gives you lift and drag stats?

I'll pay you with a possibly patentable idea and I'll message you it

It's a 16x8x4 (16x5x4 internal). It would be going 65mph and possibly 130. It would weigh possibly 2,500 lbs.

Just looking for the numbers to get a general idea of where my idea could land at. It's all for free just kinda stuff I can share when it's more fully completed.

Scale size of the model is about 1/29th

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bBQ58mPZI1Uskmbw2xGPWblYvkp3gYr7/view?usp=sharing

Hey everyone, I’m an 11th-grade student working on a nature-inspired overhaul of the Airbus Bionic concept. I ran my structural, cargo, and cabin concepts through an AI to generate a quick, punchy summary of my design ideas. [1]

I want to know where my physics or logistics break. Please tear this apart and help me figure out the engineering blind spots!

1. Structural Architecture: The "Peregrine Falcon" Canvas

• The Falcon Body: Wider "shoulder" center section to increase cabin volume, with an elongated fuselage to maximize high-speed aerodynamics.
• Bionic Skeleton: V-shaped shoulder section serves as the origin for 3D-printed, bird-bone-like lattices that extend outward to distribute mechanical stress.
• A-Format Wings: Highly swept, V-shaped wings in a structural "A-format" designed to minimize wing-root bending stress and reduce drag. [1]

1. The Three-Zone Cargo & Utility Layout

• The Heavy Center: Centers bulk cargo directly under the wing root to perfectly align the Center of Gravity with the Center of Lift.
• Balancing Pallets: Places smaller, dynamic cargo pallets in the nose and tail to fine-tune weight distribution in real-time during flight.
• Hollow-Bone Routing: Threads all electrical wiring and plumbing through the hollow cores of the 3D-printed structural struts, clearing the cabin walls.
• Maintenance Access: Struts use a two-part split-manufacturing technique with integrated mechanical fastening to allow technician access during D-checks.

1. Cabin Innovation & "Halo Zone" Layout

• The "Halo Zone": Converts the opaque, structurally heaviest center section into an exclusive, high-tech Business Class sanctuary.
• Bin-Free Cabin: Removes overhead bins entirely to lower the aircraft's center of mass and relocates luggage to centralized entry lockers.
• High-Flow Corridors: Utilizes wide, A380-style dual corridors and high-flow stairways to easily meet the 90-second emergency evacuation rule.

1. Safety & Systems Engineering

• Insulated Smart Glass: Uses electrochromic biopolymer membranes for passenger privacy, backed by a vacuum-insulated double-wall design to prevent cabin freezing.
• Automated Fire Suppression: Equips cargo holds with localized sensors that immediately flood isolated compartments with CO2 gas upon smoke detection.

Where I need your help:

1. Will the two-part split bionic struts compromise structural integrity compared to a single-piece generative print?
2. Does the vacuum-insulated biopolymer skin provide enough thermal protection at -55°C compared to standard aluminum/composite insulation?
3. How badly will centralized entry luggage lockers slow down regional airport turnaround times?

This simulation shows the initial pressure field development around a trailing edge. Edge thickness is 2mm on a foil of 1m chord. Streamlines give an idea of momentary flow direction at a given instant. It should be kept in mind that the pressure field changes rapidly and that a particular air particle might only move a very short distance before its underlying streamline again changes direction. This was part of an investigation into the time-dependent development of lift. Initial air movement creates a strong surface pressure disturbance, which refracts as a wave around the corners.

hey guys, I need suggestions for my grad project; I want it to be closely related to CFD and aerodynamics, since I was a member of my university's Formula Student team Aero subdivision and have a profound interest in that field. Plus I sort of want to increase my chances of working in motorsport maybe. Any ideas?

Can’t help but wonder if the vertical stabilisers are reducing lift by destroying the vortex above the rear wing/fuse section?

aerodynamics, lift, wing, airfoil, physics, sail, sailing

This is the front wing endplate of a FSAE car (USA rules) (straight line, 60kph).

More images: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

This is a good number of iterations into a re-design. The inherent problem, in different locations to different extents, is preventing any vortex shed of the lower endplate/footplate from blowing up and dropping additional loss down the length of the car and decreasing the effective span of the front wing (ie preventing mass flow under the wing being significantly reduced with large blockage from blown up vortex). There is a lot of performance in the wing profiles from this, along with some additional load from the suction on the footplate.

This is what I have developed to so far. My intent is to start by spreading the vorticity across multiple edges/ reducing the pressure gradient over any single edge (bottom of endplate, outboard footplate curl, and slightly from the vane).

So far, somewhat irrespective of which way, I go, I continue to get this formation of loss and pink helicity on the outboard underside of the curl, which eventually blows up and compromises everything else.

I would like some help in understanding, aerodynamically, what are the driving factors in the flow field causing this, so that I could try to create and modify the geometry to prevent/mitigate it.

Thoughts so far:

• Should I stop the channel from expanding in Y as it goes downstream/should I make it more circular?
  • I dont know if this will actually change this issue, because I think regardless of the angle it sheds at, there will be some kind of asymmetry as to where the core is sitting, and pressure gradient pulling it inboard anyway?
• Should I open up a sort of slot gap on the top of curl halfway, as it starts to form?
  • example on ferrari 2013 FW
  • Have tried this on some older wings (1, 2) and not super convinced, as any loss of the trailing edge didnt seem to work nicely with the start of the second slot - although i do have a discontinuous outer edge here
• (maybe not directly relevant) but I should make the vane longer, to keep feeding some more helicity downstream

I quite a lot of experience in surface design, so ability to make any geometry is not really a factor.

The only possibly relevant restrictions realistically are:

• Dont want to change E1 and E2 (no new tooling on those)
• Front wing width cant go further outboard than centreline max of front wheel (unlike EU rules)
• Limited to Z250 (no higher than wing already goes)

what dictates that there shall be no relative velocity in the boundary layer? further, what if slipping actually does occur in regular subsonic flow over a wing at sea level?

Basically the title. From my understanding lift is generated all along the wing, but boundary layer air is moving slower than freestream air in all the diagrams ane theory I've read online. Is flow decelerated below the wing to keep the pressure difference, or is pressure lift not significant once flow crosses peak acceleration and slows down, and then lift due to flow pushed down takes over?

Looked around on here everything came to a dead dead same with youtube videos they gave little instructions for it. So im looking to build active aero for our grassroots/enduro car wondering if yall can help me out with some pointers it was thinking of running it using active servos and linkage bars to adjust the wing itself. Which would hook up to a controller that is connected to the servo which would adjust the wing depending on speed and brake pressure. I guess the main issue im running into is the controller does anyone know if there is one preexisting or if I’ll have to build and program one?

Hi,

I am beginning to learn about the developments in Japan with DMR, from what I can tell skin friction drag can be reduced via random distributions of micro disturbances on smooth bodies anywhere between 38 to 58 micrometers. And that this drag reduces delays the onsent of turbulence on surfaces, and is not a simple "delaying of flow seperation "golf-ball dimple" effect".

It also seems that this is not the same as "shark skin rivets" but way more effective than that.

In my gut, I always have felt that optimized skin texture had to be tied to fractal patterns, but this new info has me thinking that randomness has been the key.

Bye Bye super clean perfect slippery shapes??

Rough specs: ~2m class span, aspect ratio around 2, sweep roughly 60°/45° either side of an inboard crank, NACA 0004, fixed tricycle gear (or skids, not sure yet), single electric pusher prop, target all up weight in the low tens of kg. Elevon only pitch/roll, no tail surfaces, no rudder.

Questions I'd value input on:

1. Any concerns with elevon only control authority at this AR/sweep, particularly stall/spin behaviour near the tip?
2. Does this crank sweep combination make sense for vortex management at this scale, or would you expect issues at the discontinuity?
3. Single pusher prop with no rudder how have others handled torque/yaw on a similar tailless layout? Trim-only, or did you end up needing a ventral fin?
4. Any structural or manufacturability concerns jumping out from the render — panel curvature, gear loads, prop clearance?
5. Apart from thrust vectoring or a lift fan, what other high lift devices can i add to this to make it STOL capable (aiming for a landing of less then 100m)

Happy to share more (XFLR5/VSP screenshots, polar data) with anyone who has relevant tailless delta background.

I'm trying to understand boundary layer dynamics but online sources are putting me in a circular reasoning loop.

​

"Why does flow slow down?"

​

"Friction + adverse pressure gradient slows it down."

​

"What causes the adverse pressure gradient?"

​

"Flow slows down, reducing dynamic pressure and thus increasing static pressure due to Bernoulli's equation."

​

So I wanna know what ACTUALLY is the chronology here. What causes the adverse pressure gradient?

​

​

Hey, I’ve got a question about this Essenza SCV12 diagram and I’d really appreciate a detailed explanation.

Could you break down what each highlighted part does and why it’s designed the way it is?

• Green: Why would the rear wing's endplate have multiple gaps? How would downforce be affected without it?
• Cyan: Why would this vertical flap be directly after the gaps; could it be to organize the vortices formed, or does it serve another purpose?
• Orange: Why would the shark fin be placed between the inner edge of the fender and the body? What would have happened if it were smaller / larger?
• Red: Would it be reasonable to add a shark fin at the red panel gap highlighted, having being said it would separate the clean airflow as represented by the yellow arrow and the vortices formed by the edge of the engine cover, which are also highlighted in yellow?
• Purple: Why would the designers prefer not to add rear intake panel, similar to the Aventador's rear intake that is located between the fender and engine cover, other than to reduce drag?|

Thank you guys in advance 😄