Aerodynamic simulation

All Honda E related discussions
upsilon
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon May 01, 2023 4:22 am

Post by upsilon »

Thomsn wrote: Sun Mar 24, 2024 12:40 pm thanks for the feedback!

i found the official drag coefficient here

and i extended the bounding box upwards.

the colors are green for 100km/h wind, red is faster wind, and blue slower wind.


i made some further tests, especially a comparison of standard ride height, and 30mm lowered ride height:


depending on different settings, the simulation gives the 30mm lowered version 6-7% less drag, and 15-30% more downforce, which is quite a bit!

based on the cw of 0.27 and a frontal area of 2.5m i get an air resistance of 312.325Newtons.
at 100km/h, this are 8,673 kW spent on air resistance.
therefore, a reduction of 6% air resistance should save 0,520 kWh per 100km at 100km/h.
taking the average official highway-efficiency of 18,38kWh/100km, this would give you a range boost of 2,82%, so 4,38km extra.

i always wondered how much the ride height affects efficiency, so now this estimate is saying a little bit, but not a huge amount!
Thanks for sharing all these interesting info. As a layman, I guess the 15% downforce means more load and might just kills the 6% reduced drag benefit gained; assuming my understanding of DRS of F1 is correct :lol:

Thomsn
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2024 11:47 pm

Post by Thomsn »

Reuben80 wrote: Mon Mar 25, 2024 4:26 pm
Peter-E wrote: Mon Mar 25, 2024 7:44 am
Thomsn wrote: Sun Mar 24, 2024 12:40 pm thanks for the feedback!

i found the official drag coefficient here
The drag coefficient in the linked article refers to the Fireblade motorcycle. The drag coefficient of the Honda e is not mentioned.
I've tried to find an official figure myself, but can't seem to find it. I could only find an estimated figure of 0.35 on the Automobile-Catalog website.
Once on an Italian car review channel I saw that they wrote 0.35 too, so it is more likely 0.35
oh damn. what an oversight by me. seems like some others took that 0.27 too:
https://www.elektroauto-vergleich.de/ve ... 208_active
https://automobil-guru.de/cw-werte-tabe ... rnflaeche/

weird that we cannot find an official number here...

of course, a cw of 0.35 would increase the air resistance to 404.866Newton,
so the savings of lowering would be even bigger, 0.674 kWh/km, so +5.65km of range
User avatar
EEEE
Posts: 538
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2021 10:33 am

Post by EEEE »

Maybe lowering would also have the benefit of the car not hoovering up so much dirt and depositing it on the back panel by the wiper. This is by far the dirtiest part of the car for me when I'm cleaning.

Hopefully not an issue given less heat generated, but I noticed when I lowered my prelude significantly, the cooling was adversely affected. The heat coming off the front radiator mostly goes out underneath the vehicle and to the sides. By lowering it, the airflow across the rad was reduced, and when exiting the vehicle you could feel just how much hotter it was running (hot air on legs exiting the wheel arch area). This was probably 30-40mm drop. Car would start to struggle with heat in very hot weather (where it previous to lowering did not).
'21 e Advance - Charge Yellow - E1702RR alloys
'17 Civic Sport CVT
'00 Prelude 2.2VTi
Post Reply