<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Backfire:
I only went through a few fluids courses before I graduated, but it seemed like streamlined objects saw better results from laminar flow, while blunt objects, like the golf ball, fared better with turbulent conditions. Is there any basis for this that you are aware of? Seems like cars would fall more towards blunt objects( have you looked at the rear of a corvette from the side ;) ).<hr></blockquote>
So far I've only had the basics of fluid dynamics so you probably know more than I do.
As for where cars fall I have no clue. They a really are a cross between the two of sorts. They have some blunt surfaces but are also strealined over other surfaces. What I'm thinking is that a car would perform best with laminar flow over the foreward sections which then transitions to turbulent flow towards the rear.
I only went through a few fluids courses before I graduated, but it seemed like streamlined objects saw better results from laminar flow, while blunt objects, like the golf ball, fared better with turbulent conditions. Is there any basis for this that you are aware of? Seems like cars would fall more towards blunt objects( have you looked at the rear of a corvette from the side ;) ).<hr></blockquote>
So far I've only had the basics of fluid dynamics so you probably know more than I do.
As for where cars fall I have no clue. They a really are a cross between the two of sorts. They have some blunt surfaces but are also strealined over other surfaces. What I'm thinking is that a car would perform best with laminar flow over the foreward sections which then transitions to turbulent flow towards the rear.
Comment