Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
A Thesis
MASTER OF SCIENCE
in
Mechanical Engineering
by
FALL
2015
© 2015
A Thesis
by
Approved by:
____________________________
Date
iii
Student: Christopher Michael Mugnaini
I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University
format manual, and that this thesis is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to
iv
Abstract
of
by
Recently, with increasing fuel prices and advancing technology, there has been a market
for making tractor-trailer trucks more aerodynamically efficient. The tractors are being
sold with standard aerodynamic packages but there still exists room for improvement by
creating aerodynamic add-on devices for the trailer. A device that is already being used
in the aeronautical industry to control the flow of air is the vortex generator. There is a
potential for this device to be applied to the trailing edge of the trailer in order to decrease
the base wake region area and decrease the overall drag of the truck. Computational fluid
dynamics was used in order to analyze the effectiveness of multiple types of vortex
generators: wishbone, strake, conventional, delta wing, and aircraft style. SolidWorks
was used to model a Peterbilt Model 579 in 3D and ANSYS Fluent was used to simulate
the flow situation. The wishbone type and the aircraft type generated the greatest
ANSYS, while the aircraft type generated a 4.31% reduction in drag in a research release
v
of ANSYS. These results do not compare to the effectiveness of other trailer devices that
are currently on the market, but show that vortex generators can be used in order to
augment the overall drag reduction when used with other devices.
_______________________
Date
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author would like to acknowledge and thank his wife, Claire, for showing tolerance
while this paper was being written. She was supportive through all the ups and downs.
The author would also like to thank Dr. Dongmei Zhou for her technical expertise and
support.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Chapter
viii
2.2 Environmental Protection Agency .......................................................................... 14
ix
4.1.10 Vortex Strake Device...................................................................................... 45
References ......................................................................................................................... 80
x
LIST OF TABLES
Tables Page
Table 2.1 - Summary of Drag Reduction from Add-On Device [3] ................................. 17
Table 2.2 - Tractor Device Drag and Fuel Improvements [4] .......................................... 19
Table 3.4 - Results of the drag coefficient for various iterations [5] ................................ 37
Table 5.1 – RANS Turbulence Model Behavior and Usage [26] ..................................... 61
xi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figures Page
Figure 3.8 - Delta Type Vortex Generator (dimensions are in meters) [5] ....................... 35
xii
Figure 4.6 – Airtab Centerline Spacing ............................................................................ 49
xiii
Figure 5.10 – Fine Mesh Using Research Version ........................................................... 71
xiv
1
1 Background Theory
government programs, there has been a need for increasing the fuel efficiency of class 8
the road to tire contact, and from the force due to drag. In order to improve the losses
that occur due to the drivetrain, engineering changes need to occur at the manufacturer
level. These improvements are not simple at all and mostly involve improving the
thermodynamic design of the internal combustion engine. In order to improve the rolling
friction of the tires, a low rolling resistance tire must be engineered, which is more
complex than it sounds. The force due to drag is an important aspect that can be focused
on because there is much room for improvement. Devices and fairings can also be
developing aerodynamics add-on devices that improve the flow of air at various points
along a tractor-trailer truck. The following research was done in order to showcase what
devices currently exist and how effective they can be. This knowledge can then be
applied to a new add-on device that attempts to control the flow of air in a commonly
overlooked area: the base region behind the trailer. Potential devices include a waving
trailing edge, microgrooves/ riblets, a gurney, and vortex generators. The device that will
In order to fully understand the flow conditions that occur around a tractor-trailer,
it is beneficial to first review the fluid dynamics topics that apply. Fluid mechanics is the
study of liquids and gases, and the forces on them. It can include many topics ranging
from fluid statics, to flow over and through objects. What should be emphasized here is
flow over a surface and the resulting phenomena. Normally, an object, such as a car or
plane, would be moving through a fluid (air); the object having a velocity that is positive
relative to the fluid. However, it can be beneficial to imagine the fluid as moving relative
to the stationary object. The situation can also be further simplified by using an object
such as a sphere, cylinder, or flat plate in order to derive and define certain fluid
A certain situation will be examined first. A flat plate is stationary and fixed.
The fluid, which can be any fluid, passes over the top of this flat plate. The fluid starts
from a region where there is no plate, which defines the fluid initial properties. Then the
fluid reaches the plate, which results in an interaction between the solid wall and the
moving fluid. The situation is three dimensional in reality, but will be explained as two
dimensional because the properties of the fluid do not change in the direction
perpendicular to the direction of fluid flow. The most important part of the fluid-wall
interaction is the resulting “no-slip” condition. If a fluid particle is in contact with the
stationary wall, then it too can’t be moving. Since any Newtonian fluid is a viscous
fluid, then the shear stress will be directly proportional to the rate of strain.
3
𝑑𝑉
𝜏=𝜇 (1)
𝑑𝑦
𝜏 is the shear stress, 𝜇 is the dynamic viscosity, and dV/dy is the rate of strain (change in
velocity with respect to position). This means that the stationary fluid particle will exert
a force on the next fluid particle up, due to this shear stress. As the fluid moves down the
plate, the “no-slip” condition creates a layer within the fluid that has been greatly slowed
down by the wall. This region is referred to as the boundary layer, which is the region
near the surface where the flow velocity changes from the free stream value to zero at the
surface. The thickness of the boundary layer, δ, is the distance from the surface to the
point in the fluid where the flow velocity is 99% of the free stream. This value can be
calculated using other fluid properties that will be covered later on [2].
1.2 Streamlines
When a fluid interacts with an object, the velocity, pressure and position of the
fluid particles will change. In order to track these changes, certain terminology can be
used. Streamlines are the curve that is tangent everywhere to the velocity vector at each
point. Multiple streamlines can be compiled into a flow pattern. A pathline is the line
traced out by a single fluid particle and its path. A streakline is the line that is produced
by dye introduced at a single point within the flow. All of these lines are equal to each
other in steady flow, but are different in unsteady flow. Steady flow does not depend on
time, while unsteady flow does, and is usually a result of vortices that shed off an object
in certain conditions. Steady flow is not to be confused with fully developed flow, which
refers to the point on a surface where the flow condition will remain either laminar or
turbulent [2].
Another important fluid parameter to define this point is the Reynolds number. It is a
dimensionless number that can be calculated using a few important fluid properties:
The value of the Reynolds number provides useful information about the flow. At low
Reynolds numbers, the viscous effects are high, and at high Reynolds numbers, kinetic
forces are high. It is also a useful tool for determining how the fluid flow is acting at a
The free stream condition of the fluid includes constant properties for density,
viscosity, temperature, and pressure in any direction. Once the fluid comes into contact
with the surface, the fluid velocity will change and the velocity distribution will change
as the fluid progresses along the wall. It is also safe to say that the boundary layer
changes as the fluid progresses along the wall. Initially, the velocity distribution looks
almost identical to that of the flow before the surface. But it will eventually develop into
a flow that can be classified as laminar flow. Laminar flow is characterized as being
smooth and steady, and is the initial section of the boundary layer along a flat plate. If
the flow is given a long enough plate, the boundary layer will eventually develop into
being turbulent. Turbulent flow is characterized by intense cross stream mixing, and has
random and chaotic motion. Turbulent eddies transport fluid from the free stream into
the boundary layer, which causes an increased velocity gradient at the surface, a larger
shear stress, and as a result, a larger boundary layer. The region between laminar and
turbulent is known as the transition region. It is the region between the critical point and
the transition point; the critical point being where the boundary layer becomes unstable
(Re=100,000), and the transition point being where the flow becomes fully turbulent.
Since, the boundary layer and shear stress differ from laminar flow to turbulent flow;
equations are included below on how they can be solved for [2]. The equation for
5𝑥
𝛿= 1/2 (3)
𝑅𝑒𝑥
6
When referring to flow along a streamline, the pressure, position, and velocity of
the flow at one point can be related to the pressure, position, and velocity of the flow at
another point. The Bernoulli Equation is what does this, and it is shown in equation 7.
P1 V1 2 P2 V2 2
+z1 + = +z2 + (7)
γ 2g γ 2g
the equation to fluid dynamics is in the case of flow over a cylinder. In this case, the two
dimensional cross section of a cylinder is stationary and fixed, while a fluid is flowing
over it in the same manner as in the flat plate situation; however, now there is flow to the
top and bottom. Tracking the streamlines of the fluid flow, they are all parallel before
interaction with the cylinder, and begin to deflect around the shape of the cylinder as they
near it. The streamline in the very middle of the cylinder points directly at it with a 90
degree angle, so it comes to a stagnation point. This stagnation point is defined by the
7
ending of the streamline because of a velocity of zero at that point. If the free stream
velocity is known, then by using the Bernoulli equation, a pressure difference can be
solved for between this stagnation point and the point at the top of the cylinder. This
pressure distribution will become beneficial later, when drag and lift must be derived [2].
The situation of flow over a cylinder will be examined further. All of the same
fluid dynamics phenomena that have been previously discussed still apply here. A
boundary layer will form and will be either laminar or turbulent at a certain point from
the entrance. However, now because of the sudden change in geometry on the back side
of the cylinder, the flow will only follow this shape for very low Reynolds numbers (less
than 5). As the Reynolds number increases, the flow behind the cylinder will change
drastically. The flow will develop into steady separated flow, to unsteady oscillating
flow, to laminar separated flow, and finally to turbulent separated flow. The importance
of this is that there will be a physical point along the cylinder wall where the fluid
particles will separate from the surface. This flow separation is defined as where fluid
pathlines adjacent to a body deviate from the contour of the body and result in a wake
region behind the object. This condition occurs on bodies where there is a sudden change
in geometry where the fluid flow cannot remain attached. This is very common for bluff
bodies with sharp edges and can greatly increase the drag coefficient due to wake flow, a
1.7 Drag
In any case of fluid flow, there will be a resultant force on the object parallel to
the free stream velocity. This force is called drag. The drag force and the coefficient of
drag can both be solved for by using the following equation. The drag force will increase
as density, velocity, or frontal area of the object increases [2]. The drag coefficient is
the air. The air will create a drag force that opposes the objects motion. This, in turn,
causes the vehicle to have to create more power in order to do the same amount of work.
Drag is an inevitable force that must be minimized in order to maximize the amount of
power that goes into actually moving the vehicle forward [2].
Drag can be divided up into two separate types that add together to give the total
drag. These two types are called form drag and friction drag. Form drag, also called
pressure drag, is the result of a pressure difference between opposite sides of an object.
A good example of this is the case of the flow over a cylinder. In this case, at Reynolds
9
numbers above 5, the flow is separated behind the cylinder, which creates a wake region
behind it. This wake region is a low pressure zone due to the lack of the fluid within it.
This pressure difference is form drag. Friction drag is a result of the shear stress between
the fluid and an object. Friction drag and form drag total together to give the resulting
1.8 Lift
Lift is the resultant force perpendicular to the free stream velocity. Lift is a result
For this reason, lift must be mentioned and not ignored, however will not be very critical
in the analysis of tractor-trailer aerodynamics. The equation for the lift force and lift
the resulting decrease in drag coefficient is what is most important. Realistically while a
truck is traveling on the highway, it will experience wind from a variety of angles. These
angles are effectively yaw angles. Instead of just calculating the drag coefficient at zero
yaw with no wind, the wind averaged drag coefficient can be calculated by taking into
account the average wind speed over an expected range of yaw angle. The wind
2
̅𝐶̅̅𝐷̅(𝑉𝑡 ) = 1 ∫2𝜋 𝐶𝐷 (𝜓) [𝑉𝑟 (𝜓)] 𝑑𝜙
2𝜋 0 𝑉𝑡
1 2𝜋 𝑉 2 𝑉
= 2𝜋 ∫0 𝐶𝐷 (𝜓)[1 + ( 𝑉𝑤 ) + 2 ( 𝑉𝑤 ) cos(𝜙)]𝑑𝜙 (10)
𝑡 𝑡
Vw is the mean wind speed for North America, Vt is the speed of the truck relative to the
road, ψ is the yaw angle of the truck, and ϕ is the angle at which the wind is blowing
2 Tractor-Trailer Aerodynamics
when applying a new drag reduction device. There are specific reasons why aerodynamic
devices are being produced now and why there are only being applied to certain regions
of the tractor-trailer. The trucking industry and their fleet owners play a huge role in
determining if there is a market for these items. The truck and trailer manufacturers
along with the United States Environmental Protection Agency also play a big role in the
2.1 Introduction
A large amount of research and effort was put into truck aerodynamics in the late
1970’s and early 1980’s. This was the result of the rapidly increasing fuel prices of that
time. Researchers focused on cab shaping and creating aerodynamic add-on devices for
the tractor as opposed to add-on devices for the trailer. These aerodynamic add-on
devices included the cab-roof-mounted air deflector and the body fairing [3]. Add-on
devices for the tractor were first more appealing to develop because there were
approximately 3 trailers per tractor, average in North America [4]. Add-on devices
needed only to be purchased for the tractor in order to improve the aerodynamic qualities
of multiple trailers. For this reason, there is a higher return on investment when add-on
devices are purchased for the tractor only. Also, owner/ operators of fleets owned only
the tractors and not the trailers, so there was no need to purchase add-on devices for the
12
trailers. Trailers are leased or client owned, so there were no incentives for money to be
spent on items that save money for the owners of the tractors [3].
The truck aerodynamic improvements of the late 1970’s are referred to as first-
generation add-on devices, and include: cab shaping, cab-mounted deflectors, trailer front
end fairings, cab side extenders, and body front edge rounding. However, during that
time, research was also conducted on devices such as the tractor-trailer gap seal, trailer
side skirts, and rear boat-tailing. These devices are referred to as second generation add-
on devices and did not gain popularity at the time because of the fact that they are applied
to the trailer. More recently, a need to revisit these devices has emerged because of fuel
At 55 miles per hour, and without any aerodynamic add-on devices, a tractor-
trailer can produce a wind averaged drag coefficient between 0.80 and 1.00. First
13
generation add-on devices have the potential to decrease the overall drag coefficient from
0.15 up to 0.25. However, second generation devices may only have the potential to
decrease the drag coefficient another 0.03 to 0.10. It is also for this reason that they have
not gained popularity. But, if multiple devices are used simultaneously, then it becomes
a cheap and viable option for reducing the drag coefficient even further, and allowing for
The primary resistance forces for a Class 8 tractor-trailer are: drivetrain losses,
rolling friction, and aerodynamic drag. A Class 8 GVWR is a vehicle above 33,000
pounds [5]. Aerodynamic drag will be of focus here, since simple low-cost devices can
be added to the tractor or trailer in order to decrease this drag. The distribution of these
The drag in the target area in the front of the cab can be decreased by shaping of the cab
engine cover. This is really only a parameter that can be changed at the factory and
through careful design by the tractor manufacturer. This is not easily changed through
the use of any add-on device. The drag that occurs in the gap region between the tractor
14
and trailer can be decreased by adding certain devices that block the cross mixing of the
flow from one side of the vehicle to the other. These devices are not very popular on the
American market yet, with the exception of one device. Airtab vortex generators are a
device that adds momentum to the flow in this region outside the gap so that the flow
does not enter the gap. Airtabs will be analyzed in detail later [7]. The drag that is
caused by the tractor wheels and the trailer bogey can be decreased through the use of
tractor side skirts and trailer side skirts. The drag at the base region of the trailer can be
decreased by a few different devices. The most popular device on the market today is the
boat tail device that consists of large plates that extend out into this region at an angle.
The air flow remains attached to these plates, which results in a smaller low pressure
wake region. A device that can also be effective in this region is the vortex generator;
The EPA is a government agency that focuses on creating programs that can
motivate the private sector to make decisions that are beneficial to the environment. In
this case, SmartWay Technology is a set of voluntary programs that allow fleets to create
class 8 tractors and trailers that are more fuel efficient which also generate less pollution.
Once they are certified as SmartWay, the fleet owners can have complete confidence that
there will be a return on investment or cost savings on the tractor or trailer. In order to
create a SmartWay tractor it must have idle reduction, clean current engine and
15
aerodynamics, and low rolling resistance tires. In order to create a SmartWay trailer it
must have low rolling resistance tires, be 53 feet long, and have verified aerodynamic
devices. The fleet owner can install these verified devices on their own in order to
achieve fuel savings and be able to use the SmartWay logo on the side of the vehicle, or
the device manufacturer can have their devices verified so that the device can be placed
1. 1.0%-3.9%
2. 4.0%-4.9%
3. 5.0%-8.9%
The fuel savings bins are based on a long haul tractor-trailer being tested in a controlled
manner at 65 miles per hour. These bins are created so that fleet owners can choose a
device from each bin and use them together in order to add cumulatively the fuel savings.
The advantage of an aerodynamic device being SmartWay verified in one of these bins is
that they will be listed on the SwartWay website so that they can be chosen by a fleet in
order to build a SmartWay truck or trailer [8]. SmartWay verifies trailer aerodynamic
16
devices that are used on a long haul box or refrigerated trailer. The fuel savings are
calculated based on tests that are performed by the manufacturer of the device, and the
testing procedures must adhere to certain guidelines. For example, if the test is being
performed on a test track, the test methods used must be in accordance to SAE J1321
Type II test procedures [9]. Tests are also conducted in a wind tunnel, by coastdown, or
only seen as supplemental testing. The manufacturer is responsible for funding all of the
tests and these test protocols can be found online at the SmartWay website. Once the
testing is complete, the Environmental Protection Agency will review the design of the
device and all of the details of the test. If the aerodynamic device is approved as a fuel
saving SmartWay device it will be posted on the SmartWay web page [10].
Several wind tunnel tests were done by Kevin R. Cooper at the Aerodynamics
0.38 lb/(hp-hr), and the resulting fuel savings were calculated using the following
equation:
̅̅̅̅
𝜟𝝁(𝟔𝟓) = 𝟒. 𝟑𝟕𝟎 × 𝟏𝟎−𝟕 𝑽𝟐𝒕 (𝑪 𝑫 𝑨) (11)
17
This equation solves for US gallons per mile, where A is equal to 100 square feet and Vt
is in miles per hour. The effectiveness of the various aerodynamic add-on devices tested
The last row shows a drag reduction and fuel savings from second generation add-on
devices alone. This reduction in drag is actually greater than the drag reduction from the
standard first generation aerodynamic package. When the standard aerodynamic package
is used in conjunction with all second generation devices the fuel savings totals to 7,625
Another set of tests were performed by Cooper along with Leuschen [4] of the
of three phases overall: the first test was explained above, the second test optimized those
designs, and the third test consisted of all commercially available products and any
possible prototypes that could decrease the drag coefficient of a tractor-trailer. The third
18
test was performed in the National Research Council wind tunnel in Ottawa, Canada just
as the other tests were. The difference here is that the following aerodynamic add-on
-roof deflector
-fender mirrors
-side mirrors
-bug deflector
-deer bumper
-hub caps
The truck used was a Volvo VN 660 with a 28 foot trailer and the frontal area was 10.9
square meters. Wind averaged drag coefficients were calculated at a velocity of 29.6
meters/second. The drag force is measured and the drag coefficient is calculated using
equation 8, while the wind averaged drag coefficient is calculated using equation 10. The
results for the original equipment manufacturer devices are summarized below.
These results are technically only applicable to this specific tractor model; however the
overall magnitudes relative to each other can be expected in other applications. The
20
noteworthy result was the deer bumper, which actually caused a reduction in drag for the
tractor-trailer.
The results for the new add-on devices are summarized below.
Change in Drag
Coefficient Annual Fuel (L)
Base Drag Reduction
Transtex Composite folding trailer rear deflector 0.0506 3047
Aerovolution inflatable trailer rear fairing 0.0438 2638
Trailer vortex strakes -0.0195 -1174
Trailer leading edge fairings
Freight Wing Inc. NXT Leading Edge Fairing w/o roof fairing 0.0369 2222
Manac prototype trailer leading edge fairing 0.0335 2017
Freight Wing Inc. NXT Leading Edge Fairing w/ roof fairing 0.0019 -114
Underbody Drag Reduction
Freight Wing Belly Fairing (low rider) 0.0478 2879
Laydon Composites main and rear skirts 0.0391 2355
Laydon Composites main skirts 0.0376 2264
Freight Wing Belly Fairing (low rider) 0.0367 2210
Francis Cardolle trailer bogey fairing 0.0145 873
Francis Cardolle trailer wheel fairings 0.0078 470
Gap Sealing
Laydon Composites Trailer Nose Fairing 0.0135 813
Volvo cab-extender extensions 0.0123 741
Labyrinthine tractor-trailer gap seal 0.0018 108
The greatest drag reductions were found at the base of the trailer where there is a large
region of separated flow. This region is the most untreated form of drag on a tractor-
trailer, but most of these devices aim at dealing with this problem. The vortex generators
actually increased the overall drag because they did not affect the base pressure, but did
add tare drag on the angle sections themselves. These vortex generators were vortex
strake devices fabricated out of 51mm by 51mm aluminum angle cut to 914mm long. Six
21
were installed on each side of the trailer at a 30 degree angle from the horizontal. Four
were mounted on the top of the trailer at a 30 degree angle from the trailer centerline.
As for the trailer side skirts, both brands performed equally, but the rear skirts were
ineffective. The closer the skirt gets to the ground the better, as most of the drag
reduction comes from the fact that the skirts are sheltering the trailer bogey from any
flow.
The trailer rear deflector and the inflatable rear fairing were the other most effective
devices. The rest of the tested devices created only a slight decrease in drag or none at
all. The combination of tractor to trailer gap sealing, side extenders, trailer side skirts,
and trailer boat tailing provides a total drag reduction of 0.111. This converts to a fuel
savings of 1,761 US gallons at 62 miles per hour for 81,000 miles a year. If all of the
devices cost $2,200 to install, and the price of gas is assumed to be $3 per gallon, then the
devices will pay themselves off within three months. Taking into account the fact that
three trailers exist for every tractor, then the breakeven point becomes 14 months [4].
Add-on devices, like the ones above, were also tested by Wood and Bauer of
SOLUS Solutions and Technologies [6]. This time the tests were performed using actual
operational data. Three devices were part of the tests: the Cross-flow Vortex Trap
Device, the Vortex Strake Device, and the Undercarriage Flow Device. The one of
particular interest is the vortex strake device since it has been tested by others and is a
form of vortex generator that is applied to the trailing edge of the trailer [6].
The Cross-flow Vortex Trap Device was applied to the tractor-trailer gap region
and is intended to decrease the amount of flow that passes through said gap. The device
consists of six vertical fins that are attached to the front face of the trailer. They run the
entire height of the trailer and create small pocket regions in between each one that allow
vortices to form. These vortices disrupt the flow of air that would otherwise continue on
through the tractor-trailer gap and increase the pressure on the front face of the trailer.
23
This device is especially effective at greater angle of yaw as the gap is wider in that case
[6].
The undercarriage flow device is attached to the lower surface of the trailer near
the trailer edge. Its purpose is to take the low momentum flow that usually occurs in this
region and transforms it into high momentum flow. It is very similar to the design of
standard trailer side skirts, except that it curves inward toward the rear of the trailer in a
The vortex strake devices, as shown earlier were also tested here. They were
installed on the side and top surfaces of the trailer in the same manner as the other tests.
The vortex strake device creates a limited number of large scale vortices that energize the
flow in the trailer wake. This energized flow results in a stable bluff-base flow and a
higher pressure that acts on the trailing face of the trailer [6].
The experiment was different than a usual SAE Type I or Type II tests because
these devices were placed on operational vehicles. The devices were all placed on
tractor-trailers that were all part of the same fleet. The trailers were all Great Dane model
with a gap dimension of 40 inches. Operational data was recorded daily by the use of the
Cummins Engine INSITE data acquisition and analysis system. The fleet owner made
sure to always use the same fuel in all of the tractors and to verify that the devices were
always functioning properly. The fleet owner however, did not provide any additional
maintenance, did not alter any routes because of the study, and did not allow the devices
24
to interfere with fleet operations. The test occurred between July 2001 and March 2002
and between July 2002 and March 2003 [6]. The results are as follows:
All three devices were on tractor-trailers that totaled over 85,000 miles of use. The
speed of 47.5 miles per hour. This fuel economy improvement corresponds to a 30
percent decrease in drag coefficient if all the devices are used together. The tests also
proved that none of these devices created a negative impact on the operation of the fleet
[6].
In order to reduce the drag of a tractor-trailer, there are many devices that have
been implemented already. Some of these devices are more effective than others, but
when used together, the devices can save thousands of gallons of fuel every year. The
most effective devices being the aerodynamic fairing on the tractor, trailer side skirts, and
trailer boat tails. The trailer devices were ignored in the past because fleet owners had
little incentives to implement them [3]. Now with the Environmental Protection Agency
SmartWay program fleet owners are being motivated to use them to achieve even more
3 Vortex Generators
With 25 percent of the overall drag being generated at the base of the trailer, there
is a demand to implement a device that decreases the wake region area. At the moment,
boat tail devices create a surface that is angled into the wake region so that the fluid flow
can remain attached and cut down on the low pressure zone behind the trailer [10]. This
may not be the only way to achieve a decrease in the wake region area. A device that can
be effective would be one that creates turbulence in the boundary layer so that the flow
becomes energized. This situation is also seen in the design of golf balls. The dimples
on the surface of a golf ball trip turbulence in the boundary layer which reduces the flow
separation behind it. They cause a change in the critical Reynolds number (transition
from laminar to turbulent boundary layer) [6]. This same concept can potentially be
In the case of separated flow, pressure drag can account for the majority of the
drag force [2]. In order to reduce the drag on the object, the wake region behind it must
be reduced. This can be accomplished by streamlining the shape of the object or by using
other mechanical devices: moving skin, vanes, discharging high velocity fluid, suction,
and vortex generators. Vortex generators are ramps or wedges that are placed ahead of
the expected separation point [11]. Vortex generators are small wing shaped plates that
extend perpendicular to the wing surface about an inch. Multiple vortex generators are
mounted down the length of the wing at a specific interval; typically every 6 inches [12].
26
They are typically the height of the boundary layer and transport momentum from the
free stream fluid back into the boundary layer. The vortex that sheds from the trailing
edge of the vortex generator trips turbulent flow which carries more energy than laminar
flow. This mixing of the boundary layer and free stream fluid can delay separation and
decrease the size of the wake region behind the object. Vortex generators do add a small
amount of drag due to the pressure drag seen at the vortex generator itself, however they
decrease the overall drag of the object far more due to the before mentioned delay of
separation [11].
Vortex generators are commonly used on aircraft wings in order to control the
boundary layer and delay separation. With a boundary layer that remains close to the
surface of the wing, the aircraft becomes more controllable. Vortex generators can also
be applied to automobiles, since the natural shape of an automobile is one that the fluid
flow will not always remain attached. The rear window section of a vehicle is of most
importance. A low pressure region will occur here due to the vehicle height becoming
progressively lower and the flow continues over the rear of the vehicle. This geometry
will create reverse flow acting against the main fluid flow at point C.
Point B is the separation point where the pressure gradient and momentum of the
boundary layer are balanced. With the addition of vortex generators, momentum is
mixed from the upper region into the lower region of the boundary layer and the
accomplishes two things: it narrows the low pressure region that causes drag and it raises
the pressure of the flow separation region. These two effects together decrease the
3.2 Background
Vortex generators were first used in England in the aeronautical industry and were
invented by Bill Lear. Vortex generators are small add-on devices that were originally
intended to be mounted on the top surface of airplane wings; however they can be applied
to many different aerodynamic designs. They can be used on passenger vehicles, race
“Vortex generators are boundary layer control devices.” [12] In the case of an
airplane wing, the fluid boundary layer develops in the same manner as the flat plate
example. It begins as fully laminar flow, and transitions into fully turbulent flow.
Laminar flow is good because it does not create much friction drag, however it is bad
because it does not carry much momentum, and as a result will separate as the wing gains
an angle of attack. Separation for a wing is bad because it leads to stall. Stall is the point
where the wing is no longer generating lift. Turbulent flow produces more friction drag,
but carries more resistance to flow separation. Each vortex generator creates a very thin
spinning vortex off the top trailing tip that carries energy and momentum into the
boundary layer. This energy in turn creates turbulence which delays separation, which
allows for a wing that can be moved to a greater angle of attack without stalling [12].
There are various shapes and designs that can be used in order to generate a
vortex to improve boundary layer conditions. Conventional, vane type, passive vortex
generators with a height, h, that is in the order of the boundary layer thickness, δ, were
first introduced by Taylor in the late 1940’s. These devices are small plates or airfoils
that are mounted normal to the surface and set at an angle, β, to the fluid flow direction.
Conventional vortex generators are in wide use in the airplane industry in order to control
a local flow separation over a relatively short downstream distance. Conventional vortex
generators are cheap and easily installed, and are therefore used very often on the top
A more efficient design was developed by Kuethe in the early 1970’s. These
wave-type vortex generators have a height to boundary layer thickness ratio of 0.27-.42,
and use the Taylor-Goertler instability to generate streamwise vortices within the
boundary layer. This type of vortex generator has a lower height than that of
conventional type, so the amount of parasitic drag is much less. They are generally
smaller in overall size as well, so they can be stored inside slots in wings when not
needed. However, they can be slightly more complex to manufacture than conventional
conventionally shaped vortex generators with a height of the low profile type [14].
Vortex generators can be classified into two main categories: Vane-type and
Wheeler. Of the vane-type, the vortex generators can be mounting in either the co-
30
rotating or counter-rotating orientation. Of the Wheeler type, the vortex generators are
either shaped like wishbones or are two consecutive ramps known as doublets [14].
It is shown that vane type vortex generators with a height of 20% of the boundary
layer are the most effective at reducing the separation region. Vane type vortex
generators with a height of 80% of the boundary layer are next, with wishbone type and
Three types of vortex generators were tested in wind tunnel TAD-2 of the
National Aviation University of Ukraine. The wind tunnel has a maximum speed of air
flux of 42 m/sec, and a length, width, and height of 5.54 m, 4 m, and 2.5 m respectively.
The devices were placed on the back edge of the roof of a small sport utility vehicle. The
first vortex generator type was a counter-rotating VG pair 25mm in height. Each VG in
the pair was set at 15 degrees from being parallel to the direction of fluid flow. There
were seven vortex generators and they were placed 36 mm from the rear edge. The
second vortex generator type was prism shaped, with a height of 10 mm. 30 of these
vortex generators were placed 36 mm from the rear edge, with no angle to fluid flow
direction. The third vortex generator type was of Clark type profile and 8 vortex
generators were used from every side of the longitudinal axis. The results of these tests
A type of vortex generator already exists on the market today that is being used
specifically for reducing the drag on tractor-trailers. The wishbone shaped vortex
generators are known as Airtabs, and are manufactured by Aeroserve Technologies Ltd
out of Ottawa, Canada. “Airtab vortex generators are scientifically shaped ramps that
extend into airstreams and create vortices – whirlwinds of air which help smooth the flow
of air onto surfaces or into the void behind a bluff trailing edge.” [16] Mounting Airtabs
on the trailing edge of the tractor can show an improvement of 2-3.5% in fuel
consumption. Mounting the vortex generators in this location helps energize the flow in
the region between the tractor and trailer. The energized flow resists entering the tractor-
trailer gap. The pressure in this region is then decreased, which decreases the overall
pressure difference for the overall tractor-trailer. Two low mileage DAF tractors with
33
streamlined trailers were used for the BTAC test on the Motor Industry Research
Association high speed test track. The tractors both had roof fairings and side extenders.
The Airtab Vortex Generators were fitted on the rear edge of the side extenders, and both
trucks completed a run with the vortex generators, and one run without. The results to
Airtabs
MPG %
Vehicle Without With Improvement Improvement
12 9.05 9.2 0.15 1.6
13 9.25 9.41 0.16 1.7
The average speed on the track was 48 miles per hour, instead of 56 or more miles per
hour like on the actual highway. Also, the vortex generator kit was only a partial kit,
without any vortex generators fitted to the top of the tractor or to the trailer. This partial
kit was roughly 67% of a full kit, so the fuel savings could theoretically be 33% greater
than what was seen in the test. Extrapolating out to 56 miles per hour as well gives
theoretical fuel economy improvements of 5.3% for vehicle 13 and 3.1% for vehicle 12.
Taking the average of these two values gives an overall fuel economy improvement of
4.1% [16].
Delta wing shaped vortex generators were studied in a wind tunnel and using
computational fluid dynamics on a Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VIII. The velocity was
34
set to 50 meters per second and six component forces were measured. The optimum
shape and size for the vortex generators were investigated. The flow field in the wind
tunnel was measured by the particle image velocimetry method and using the software
package tools in computational fluid dynamics. The vortex generators are intended to be
mounted on just the roof of the vehicle just above the rear window [13].
The length to height ratio of the delta wing vortex generator is 2. It is mounted
with a yaw angle of 15 degrees with an interval to height ratio of 6. This calculates to
heights tested of 15 mm, 20 mm, and 25 mm. They are all 5 mm thick.
In order to mount each vortex generator at a yaw angle of 15 degrees, the air flow was
investigated at the trailing edge of the roof, where they will be mounted. The flow is
aligned with the longitudinal axis of the vehicle at the centerline of the roof and increases
in angle as the measurement increases away from the centerline. For this reason, the
vortex generators are installed at a 15 degree angle at the centerline of the vehicle, but
have no angle towards the left and right edges of the roof [13].
35
immediately upstream of the flow separation point just above the rear window of the
sedan. The optimum height was found to be near the thickness of the boundary layer: 15
to 25 mm. The optimum placement was to arrange them in a row in the lateral direction
100 mm upstream of the roof end at 100 mm intervals. Application of the vortex
generators to the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution showed a 0.006 deduction in the drag
coefficient. By measuring the total pressure, the velocity distribution, and by using
computational fluid dynamics, it can be concluded that the vortex generators create
streamwise vortices that mix higher and lower layers of the boundary layer. This causes
the flow separation point to shift downstream and decrease drag [13].
version of the delta type vortex generator was chosen and its geometry is shown below.
Figure 3.7 - Delta Type Vortex Generator (dimensions are in meters) [5]
36
The height of the vortex generator is the height of the boundary layer. A simple model of
a class 8 tractor-trailer was done in DS SolidWorks and this model was imported into
ANSYS Workbench V12. The overall length of the tractor-trailer was 8.25 m, with a rear
cab gap of 0.25 m and a height of 1.5 m. The flow domain around the model consisted of
between the front of the tractor and the inlet to the flow domain. Five iterations of the
simulation were performed following the original. With each iteration, more vortex
generators were added to the model or the model geometry was modified. First, the
tractor height was increased by 5cm. Then, three vortex generators were added to the
tractor end. Then, three more vortex generators were added to the trailer end. Then,
three more vortex generators were added to the trailer base end. Last, 1 vortex generator
each was added to the trailer end sides. A standard κ-ε model was used for all the
simulations. This two equation turbulence model allows for the turbulent velocity and
length scales to be determined independently. The model was meshed using a fully
This produced mesh elements that were tetrahedral. The boundary conditions were as
follows: inlet velocity=22.35 m/s along x, outlet pressure=0 Pa (gauge pressure), the
ground was modeled as a moving wall (22.35 m/s along x), and the body was models as a
stationary wall (0 m/s). The result for each iteration is shown below [5].
37
Table 3.4 - Results of the drag coefficient for various iterations [5]
The vortex generators are effective for reducing drag for the zero yaw condition. The
9.1% [5].
using computational fluid dynamics software by [17]. Four types of sub boundary layer
3. Conventional, counter-rotating
4. Airtabs
A device height of 20 mm was used which is equal to the boundary layer in the
simulation. The conventional vortex generators were 80 mm long and were spaced on 80
mm intervals. They all had an angle of 15 degrees to the flow direction [17].
Workbench. The mirrors, turn signals, small accessories, sleeves, and other small
38
elements were removed because these objects would create an overly complex finite
element analysis. A symmetrical model was also used so that the computational cost of
the simulation could be reduced. There was a distance of 4000 mm in the air volume
from the front of the cab to the air inlet, and 25,000 mm between the back of the trailer to
the air outlet. The vehicle’s body was then subtracted from the air volume so that a
negative image of the body is created, and a tetrahedral mesh with lineal Lagrange
elements can be applied. A 6mm element edge in the surface vehicle mesh was used,
with a denser discretization in the areas where greater speed gradients are expected. The
wheel pitch, the front of the vehicle, the area between the cab, and the area behind the
trailer are all areas where detachment will occur. After a mesh was generated with a
1000 mm maximum element size and 1.2 growth factor, mesh independency can be
determined. Six meshes were used in the study: 1 million, 5 million, 10 million, 20
million, 30 million, and 40 million elements. It was determined that the mesh is
independent past 10 million elements, so that particular mesh was used for the rest of the
simulation [17].
A kappa- omega turbulence model was chosen with steady state equations, wall
treatment, and non-equilibrated flow. This model was chosen for its robustness,
economy, and reasonable accuracy. An inlet flow velocity of 22 meters/second was used
along with a low turbulent intensity of 0.1%. First order equations were used for the first
300 iterations and second order equations were used for the remaining iterations. The
resulting drag force values are shown in the Table 3.5 below for all the models.
39
The optimum shape for a vortex generator was investigated by Raykowski and
Eastlake of Cessna Aircraft Company [18]. In order to create a good engineering design,
order to test the different designs of vortex generators, a 1/4 scale Piper Cherokee wing
was used instead of mounting full scale vortex generators to an actual airplane wing for
flight tests. Flight tests would increase the cost of the design in the end, and could prove
possibly dangerous since it is unknown how the wing dynamics will be affected. The
University. A Reynolds number of 2,800,000 was used along with a fluid velocity of 85
ft/sec. It would be beneficial for the transition point to occur on the same point on the
40
scaled wing as it does on the actual wing. In order for this to happen, a rough strip was
The rectangular vortex generators were 0.0115 inches thick and varied in height:
0.05, 0.1, and 0.2 inches. Vortex generators with a 30 degree and a 45 degree sweep to
the leading edge were also tested. Angles of incidence, spanwise row density, and
quantity were varied for each vortex generator type. Lastly, co-rotating configurations
following order: wing alone, angle of incidence, geometry, height, row density,
configuration, and quantity. The optimal vortex generator from each test was then used
in the following test. At the end of all the tests, over 40 configurations were used. The
rectangular vortex generator turned out to be the most effective geometry since it is
simple and creates the greatest lift with a shallow angle of incidence. It became apparent
that the vortex generators must all be tall enough to extend past the height of the
boundary layer. Micro vortex generators, with a height of less than half of the boundary
layer thickness, do not create sufficient mixing between high velocity and low velocity
layers. The 0.05 inch and 0.1 inch vortex generators would be classified as micro vortex
generators. For vortex generator spacing, 3 inches was optimal, with effectiveness
decreasing as the spacing measurement increases or decreases away from that dimension.
quantity could be used in order to achieve the same result, but this configuration was
There is already sufficient research that has been done on vortex generators and
some of which has been done on the application of vortex generators to tractor-trailers.
They have existed for decades and are a standard in the aeronautical industry. They show
promising results in any case on being able to change the flow characteristics to a more
preferred condition.
42
At this point, using the applicable studies, there are certain vortex generator
designs that could be effective in this case. These will be explained later. Computational
fluid dynamics will be used as a type of study, so a 3 dimensional model must also be
created of a typical tractor-trailer that can provide data for a wide variety of tractor-
trailers. The specific geometry and dimensioning of the chosen vortex generators and
tractor-trailer is to follow.
Vortex generators have been used on passenger jets for decades [12]; however
they have only recently been applied to tractor-trailer vehicles [16]. Certain design
optimization has been done on vortex generators for aircraft but not much has been done
for tractor-trailers [18]. For this reason there is a need for studies to be done on vortex
generators when applied to a tractor-trailer. Airtab vortex generators are generally only
applied to the tractor-trailer gap [16] and vortex strake devices are not necessarily a
proven device [4]. All of the above research should be considered and compiled so that it
can contribute to the said study, and so that the study can help improve the field.
trailer base region [6], so there exists potential for vortex generators to be applied at the
trailing edge of the trailer to attempt to decrease the trailer wake region volume.
Different designs should be chosen and studied in order to evaluate their effectiveness.
This can be done in multiple ways: scaled model wind tunnel testing, full scale wind
tunnel testing, track test, operational testing, coastdown testing, or computational fluid
43
dynamics [8]. Due to the available resources, for this study it has been chosen to use
has certain limitations and caution must be taken when using it, however if used correctly
it can be a powerful tool [19]. This will be explained later. The software will be used to
calculate the overall reduction in drag for a certain model of tractor-trailer when vortex
generators are applied. These results will be compared to one another and to the data
present in other sources. The results will show which vortex generator design is the most
Airtabs do possess the ability to decrease the overall drag when applied to the tractor-
trailer gap [16], so they will be the first device to be studied. Vortex strake devices have
been shown to increase the overall drag and decrease the overall drag, so they are a
device that needs further study [4]. Conventional style and aircraft style vortex
generators are used very often in the aircraft industry, so it may be possible that they will
also be effective here [14]. Delta type vortex generators are used on passenger vehicles
for the very same reason that they could be effective in this application [13], so they will
also be chosen as a device to be studied. The geometry of each of these devices will be
1. Airtabs
3. Conventional
4. Delta Wing
5. Aircraft
4.1.9 Airtab
aerodynamic drag on tractor-trailers. Wishbone type vortex generators are shaped the
way that they are so that the device extends out of the boundary layer without any sharp
edges. They are roughly one inch tall, four inches long, and five inches wide. [16]
A vortex strake device is three foot long piece of 90 degree angle steel. It is two
inches tall and 2 inches wide. This vortex generator is a patent pending device and has
already undergone extensive real world tests. The vortex strake device is essentially a
conventional vortex generator that functions because of the extreme length and mounting
angle. Each one on the side of the trailer is mounted at 30 degrees to the longitudinal
axis of the trailer, and each one on the top of trailer is mounted at 30 degrees with the
leading edge inboard. There should be five on each side of the trailer and four on the top.
This vortex generator design produces a limited number of large vortices that energize
The conventional vortex generator is simply a flat plate that extends perpendicular to
the surface that it is mounted to. It can be mounted either parallel to the direction of fluid
flow, or it can have an angle to the said flow. If there is an angle, the vortex generators
can either all share the same angle, which is called co-rotating, or every other vortex
generator can be mounted at an angle equal but opposite, which is called counter-rotating.
46
This style of vortex generator is relatively large scale in reference to the boundary layer
thickness. They are effective at controlling separation using a localized flow at a short
downstream distance, even though they do create a small amount of drag just because of
their size. [14] This particular vortex generator has a small flange broke at the bottom so
that they can be easily mounted to the surface. It is 1 3/16 inches tall which is near the
height of the boundary layer, 2 3/8 inches long which is two times the height, and 1/16
inches thick. This design is based on the vortex generator design used in [20].
The next type of vortex generator is known as the delta-wing shaped vortex generator.
This type is shaped the way it is so that it can extend up into the boundary layer without
having as much surface area to create drag. The sharp point is all that is required to shed
the attached flow and create a swirling vortex. The design used is based on the
rectangular vortex generator used in [13] and [18]. It is relatively thick at 3/16 inches,
but follows the same convention as the previous vortex generator where the length is two
47
times as much as the height. It is recommending that they are installed at 15 degrees to
the air flow direction. [13] Rectangular vortex generators are easy to manufacture and
they provide a substantial tip vortex at a shallow angle of incidence which keeps the
The last type of vortex generator is based on vortex generators that are used on small
aircraft wings. It is slightly shorter than the previous vortex generator types, but is quite
a bit longer. With a height of 1 ¼ inches and a length of 7 1/16 inches, its length to
height ratio is 5.65 instead of 2. It also has a radius to the leading edge and remains to
have a flat top edge like the conventional vortex generator. These vortex generators are
used on aircraft such as the Beech Bonanza, Baron, and Duke, the Cessna 401, 402, 414,
and 421, and the Piper Navajo, Super Cruiser, and Super Cub. They are offered by
numerous different companies, but are for the most part the same design [12].
48
4.2 Orientation
Airtabs and Vortex Strake Device both have a specific mounting procedure so
only one orientation exists for each. However, conventional, delta wing, and aircraft
2. Co-rotating
3. Counter-rotating
The Airtabs are modeled on the trailer per the installation manual [7], which is as
follows: the rows of Airtabs are installed as close to the trailing edge as possible, four
inches on center, with no angle of incidence to the direction of flow. They are installed
Vortex strake devices are modeled on the trailer in the same manner as [4] and
[6]. Five devices are placed on each side of the trailer, equally spaced, with an angle of
incidence of 30 degrees, leading edge up. Four devices are placed on the top of the
The conventional vortex generators are modeled on the trailer trailing edge in a
counter-rotating orientation. Each set of two vanes point leading edge toward each other.
Each vane has an angle of incidence to the centerline of 15 degrees. The two vanes are
four inches apart, measured from the trailing edge. Each pair is six inches apart,
The delta type vortex generators are modeled on the trailer trailing edge in a
counter-rotating orientation per [13]. Each set of two vanes point leading edge toward
each other. Each vane has an angle of incidence to the centerline of 15 degrees. The two
vanes are 57 mm apart, measured from the trailing edge. Each pair is 200 mm apart,
The aircraft vortex generators are modeled on the trailer trailing edge in a
counter-rotating orientation. Each set of two vanes point leading edge toward each other.
Each vane has an angle of incidence to the centerline of 15 degrees. The two vanes are
seven inches apart, measured from the trailing edge. Each pair is 14 inches apart,
The airtabs and vortex strake device are mounted per manufacturer instructions, while the
other three vortex generator types are mounted in equal orientations regarding angle of
incidence and the fact that they are counter-rotating. The other dimensions differ so that
each type is mounted similarly to other sources where each type is used. This is done so
that each type has the most potential to be effective and simultaneously have results that
model accurately represents a Peterbilt On-Highway Model 579 tractor hauling a Great
Dane Champion SE dry freight trailer. This tractor is a sleeper cab equipped with the full
cab aerodynamic package which includes a roof fairing, gap fairing, and side skirts. It is
dimensioned using [21]. The trailer was dimensioned using [22] and [23]. The tractor-
trailer components are named as seen in Figure 4.15 showing the SolidWorks model [24].
55
Figures 4.15 through 4.17 show the SolidWorks model that was created and the
amount of detail that went into it. The main components like the tractor aerodynamic
fairings, the trailer bogey, and the tires were all included in the model so that the overall
dimensions could be accurate. At this point, there is an adequate balance between high
and low detail. Later, when the model is imported into the computational fluid dynamics
platform, the level of detail will actually have to decrease even more.
57
5.1 Theory
a continuous domain into small sections of discrete domain. Flow variables are defined
only at these points and solutions to the governing differential equations are solved at
each of these points. Then all of the information between each point can be found
through interpolation if linear. There are a few different techniques that CFD software
uses to find solutions, but the simplest is the finite difference method where the
Fluent code uses the finite volume method where a control volume is used in order for
mass, energy, and momentum to all be conserved into and out of the cell. Last, ANSYS
must be used correctly. In order to know that the simulation is generating useful data, the
results must be validated and verified. Verification involves analysing the accuracy of
the calculation, while validation involves comparing the variable of interest to the
analytical solution in order to quantify error. In order to verify the results, a grid
independence study must be done. Each value for the variable of interest is plotted
versus the number of grid points, and the mesh is said to be independent once the said
values become unaffected by an increasing grid number. Once the optimal grid number
is found, that is the mesh that should be used for all of the following simulations. In
58
order to validate the results, a grid convergence study must be done. Error values are
calculated by comparing the CFD solutions to the analytical solution or the CFD solution
at a very fine mesh. These error values are then plotted versus the number of grid points.
If the slope of the line generated matches the order of solution method chosen in the CFD
setup, then the grid is said to be converged. When the grid is converged, then it is known
that the CFD program has reached a resulting value that is a single usable value [25].
The computational fluid dynamics packed being used is ANSYS Workbench 15.0.
The programs that work together within this package are ANSYS Design Modeler,
ANSYS Meshing, and ANSYS Fluent. Design Modeler handles the geometry, Meshing
creates a mesh on said geometry, and Fluent simulates the fluid flow. Fluent is also used
5.2 Import
geometry file. This geometry file is a simplified version of the SolidWorks file that is
shown above. The simplification is done to reduce the computational cost. With the
geometry imported, an enclosure is created around the body. This enclosure represents
the fluid volume that surrounds the tractor-trailer. It needs to be large enough so that any
fluid affected by the body can be analyzed with the simulation. The overall length of the
enclosure is approximately 271 feet and 9 inches, the width is approximately 37 feet and
6 inches, and the height is approximately 46 feet and 7 inches. The tractor-trailer body is
placed in a location so that the trailing face of the trailer is 131 feet and 10 inches from
59
the outlet of the enclosure. Also, only half of the tractor-trailer body is used, symmetric
about a plane that would be half way between the left and right sides of the trailer.
The tractor-trailer body is subtracted from the air enclosure using a Boolean operation.
This creates a void in the air enclosure where the body is, so that there is no interference
between the body and the air. The named selections are as follows:
60
The purple text in Figure 5.3 represents a hidden face and the red text represents a visible
A CFD physics preference is used along with a Fluent solver preference. Advanced user
size functions are enabled with curvature. A fine relevance center and program
controlled triangular surface mesher is used. For the rest of the mesh parameters, default
settings were used. The minimum size was adjusted in order to give various grid
numbers for each mesh. More mesh details are discussed in section 5.5.
5.3 Setup
A pressure based solver is used, with steady time, and absolute velocity
formulation. For viscous forces a turbulent boundary layer is expected. In order to select
RNG kappa-epsilon is chosen because it most accurately models swirl, vortices, and
transitional flows. All of which are associated with bluff bodies where there is massive
62
viscosity model to account for low Reynolds number effects. It also uses an analytically
general are the most widel used tubulence models for industrial applications. They are
robust and accurate and contain submodels to account for compressibility. However, the
epsilon equation contains a term which cannot be calcualted at the wall, so wall functions
must be used. [26] In this case, the solver is set to use non-equilibrium wall functions.
The air is set to be the interior, the body and wall are set as walls, the inlet is a
velocity inlet, the outlet is a pressure outlet, and the remaining surfaces are set as
symmetry. The incoming velocity is 55 miles per hour and is normal to the inlet face.
The outlet is set to have zero gauge pressure. Reference values are computed from the
The area used is the frontal area of the tractor-trailer that is projected onto the outlet face.
The inlet velocity, fluid density, and the projected area are used together along with the
drag force in order to calculate the drag coefficient. The drag force is monitored during
63
the simulation and exported as a result once the simulation has terminated. The
The Reynolds number for this simulation is calculated using equation 2. The density of
air is 1.225 kg/ cubic meter, the viscosity of air is .00001789 kg/m sec, the velocity is
24.5812 meters/ second, and the characteristic length is the width of the truck at 2.5908
5.4 Solution
For solution methods, a coupled scheme is used with a least squares cell based
gradient, second order pressure and momentum equations, and first order turbulent
kinetic energy and turbulent dissipation rate equations. A flow courant number of 50 is
used, along with a momentum relaxtion factor of 0.25, a pressure relaxation factor of
0.25, and a turbulent viscosity of 0.8. The turbulent viscosity ratio was limited to 10
million. The program is set to monitor the residuals of the differential equations during
the simulation, along with the drag coefficient of the body at each iteration. The
simulation is run for 500 iterations. Figure 5.5 displays the contours of velocity
magnitude. The maximum velocity magnitudes are shown in red are approximately equal
to 30 meters/ second. This occurs near the top surface of the tractor body and near the
leading top edge of the trailer. The regions of flow unneffected by the tractor-trailer body
remain at the inlet flow velocity of approximately 25 meters/ second. The minumim
64
velocities occur around the region near the top trailing edge of the trailer and are
approximately equal to 1.8 meters/ second. The large differnence between the maximum
and minimum velocites, combined with the fact that these velocites occur on opposite
ends of the tractor-trailer are the reason that so much drag is generated.
The fluid pathlines are shown and are colored according to the velocity magnitude.
Figure 5.6 shows the same result as Figure 5.5; the highest velocity occurring near the top
surface of the tractor body and the lowest velocity occurring near the trailing top edge of
the trailer. Figure 5.6 however shows the vortices that are generated behind the bluff
For the grid independence study, five different mesh sizes are used for separate
simulations. The meshes used are as follows: 1 hundred thousand, 2 hundred thousand, 3
hundred thousand, 4 hundred thousand, and 5 hundred thousand grids. The total force is
66
monitored and the drag coefficient is calculated as explained before. These values for
drag coefficient are plotted versus the corresponding grid numbers in order to determine
mesh independence.
0.9
0.88
0.86
0.84
Drag Coefficeint
0.82
0.8
0.78
0.76
0.74
0.72
0.7
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Grid Number (hundred thousands)
The variable of interest becomes less effected by an increasing grid number past 2
hundred thousand, so the simulation that uses a mesh of 2 hundred thousand is used for
all future simulations. Using the same data the drag coefficients for the meshes of 1
hundred thousand, 2 hundred thousand, 3 hundred thousand, and 4 hundred thousand are
compared to the drag coefficient for 5 hundred thousand in order to obtain error values.
These error values are plotted versus the grid numbers for the grid convergence study.
67
0.1
Error
0.01
0.001
Grid Number (hundred thousands)
𝐺𝑟𝑖𝑑 𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟
𝑘 = 𝐿𝑜𝑔(𝐺𝑟𝑖𝑑1 )/𝐿𝑜𝑔(𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟1) (13)
4 2
This equation yields -1/2 for the slope, which matches the order of the solution method
that was selected for the turbulent kinetic energy and turbulent dissipation rate equations.
At this point, the computational fluid dynamics simulation has been verified and
validated. This setup can then be used for the remaining simulations for comparing the
5.6 Results
A simulation for each vortex generator type is then carried out which matches the
verified/ validated solution. The results for the following five simulations are shown
below. The drag force is monitored in each case so that the drag coefficient can be
calculated in the same manner as before. These drag coefficients can then be compared
The drag coefficient is calculated for each device using equation 12. These values are
Airtabs decreased the drag for the tractor-trailer the most, with a percent improvement of
1.11. The aircraft vortex generators are in a close second and the delta vortex generators
in third. It was expected that the aircraft type and the conventional type would create a
similar result, as they have a similar design, and are used for similar applications.
However, in this case they did not produce similar results. This could be because the
mounting configurations differed greatly. The conventional vortex generators were a lot
small in size compared to the aircraft type, and the conventional vortex generators were
69
mounted closer together. It makes sense that the Airtabs provide the greatest
improvement because they are applied to tractor-trailers exclusively. 1.11% also closely
matches the 1.6% fuel mileage improvement seen in [16], even though the Airtabs were
used on the tractor and not the trailer in [16]. The improvement seen in the
computational fluid dynamics study does not come close to the improvements seen in
[17] or [5].
The change in drag coefficient is then calculated for each device and that value is
used to calculate an annual fuel savings using equation 11. It is assumed that this specific
tractor-trailer would be doing 125,000 miles in a year. It is also assumed that a baseline
situation could be created where a tractor-trailer without any devices gets 7 miles to the
gallon. Percent fuel savings are then calculated by comparing the annual fuel savings of
the vehicles with devices to the annual fuel consumption of the vehicle without devices.
The Airtabs and the aircraft vortex generators are the devices that have potential
to be verified SmartWay devices to be placed in the first fuel savings bin, however at this
point the testing that has been done is not sufficient proof that they can be SmartWay
70
verified devices. More testing must be done in order to investigate how the drag
coefficient of a class 8 tractor-trailer will be affected when vortex generators are used on
The results shown in Table 5.3 and Table 5.4 were gathered using an educational
version of ANSYS, which is limited to a mesh of 512,000 elements. The solution was
validated and verified, but just for comparison simulations were also run using the
research version of ANSYS. This software release does not have a mesh number limit
and should theoretically model three dimensional flows more realistically. The aircraft
type vortex generators were chosen to be compared to the case without any vortex
generators. This one type was chosen over the Airtabs because a cleaner mesh can be
created around them, and because there is less published data on them being applied to
The same enclosure geometry and named selections were used as in the
educational version simulations. However, now the following non default settings were
a. On: Fixed
4. Max Size = 1 m
71
a. Element size = .1 m
b. Hard behavior
The same mesh settings were used for both the model without the vortex generators and
the model with vortex generators. The mesh now contains approximately 2.5 million
The same settings for the solution setup and solution were used in the research version as
in the educational version. The main reference values can be seen in Table 5.2. The drag
force was monitored during the simulation and plotted afterwards so that a drag
The following graphics were generated using the results section of ANSYS Fluent
for both the case without vortex generators and the case with small aircraft vortex
generators:
The range of velocities for contours, vectors, and pathlines of velocity are as follows.
Red is the maximum velocity at 25 meters per second, followed by orange, yellow, and
green. Blue is the minimum velocity at 0 meters per second. Lighter blue indicates a
higher value and darker blue indicates a lower value. The range for contours of pressure
follows the same convention. Red indicates a maximum of 400 Pascal and blue indicates
a minimum of -300 Pascal relative to the velocity inlet. The case without vortex
generators is always shown on the left and the case with vortex generators is shown on
the right. Each type of graphic is shown first on the symmetry plane between the left and
right sides of the trailer and second on a supplementary plane seven feet away from and
Figure 5.11 shows an obvious decrease in the amount of dark blue that is displayed. This
indicates that the velocities are higher in the wake region, which is what the vortex
generators intend to do. The outline of this low velocity region is also decreased with the
vortex generators. They generate a less rounded shape, and in turn subtract from the
Figure 5.12 displays the same reduction in overall low velocity region in the
supplementary plane. This region is much longer in the case without vortex generators,
74
and also contains more dark blue. A decrease in both the symmetry plane and the
supplementary plane indicate that there is a three dimensional decrease in the low
In Figure 5.17 and Figure 5.18 the most important total pressure is shown in the region
behind the trailer. A very slight increase in pressure is shown in the symmetry plane
indicated by the shade of blue, while a definite decrease in area is shown in the
supplementary plane. The high pressure zone locally at the vortex generators can even be
seen, however they decrease the overall drag more than they create drag locally.
Examining Figure 5.11 through Figure 5.18 results in a discovery of the following
phenomena. Equation 7 can be used to relate velocity to pressure and equation 8 can be
used to relate the area to the amount of drag created. The values for velocity relative to
the inlet showed an increase, which is desirable because the closer the velocity is to the
free stream value, the lower the drag coefficient. The values for total pressure relative to
the inlet showed an increase. An increase in pressure is also desirable because if the
pressure value at the base of the trailer is closer to the pressure value at the front of the
tractor, then less form drag will be generated. An overall reduction in the low pressure/
velocity region volume is seen when the vortex generators are used.
77
The total drag coefficients and forces for the high element mesh simulations are
shown in Table 5.5. This time there is a greater improvement in drag coefficient. A 4%
improvement is much more promising and shows that there is potentially a greater chance
The prospective fuel savings are shown in Table 5.6. The same assumptions are made
here as in Table 5.4. In this case, the vortex generators can potentially save up to 600 US
gallons of fuel per year. This would put vortex generators in the third most effective
The results generated by the research version of ANSYS favor the effectiveness of vortex
generators more than the educational version. For this reason, further research in this
field would be beneficial and could eventually lead to the establishment of vortex
Vortex generators do create the expected flow condition in the base region of a
tractor-trailer and decrease the overall drag. Each vane creates a spanwise vortex that
enables mixing between the high velocity flow outside of the boundary layer and the low
velocity flow within the boundary layer. This turbulent flow carries more momentum
into the wake region so that there is less separated flow. Even though these add-on
devices perform as expected, their effectiveness did not compare to other devices that are
applied to the same drag source region on the trailer. For this reason, vortex generators
may or may not be chosen to be used in the trucking industry. Vortex generators may be
cheaper to purchase and install. They may also be less intrusive on the maintenance and
performance of the trailer. More research needs to be performed in order to answer these
questions. Also, the results of this computational fluid dynamics study may or may not
match the results from another form of study: track tests, wind tunnel tests, and
operational tests.
If vortex generators do seem to be a viable option for decreasing drag (the results
here suggest that may be the case), then there are many topics to follow that can be
investigated.
2. How will they be installed easily and without disturbing the operation of the
fleet?
4. How much will it cost to manufacture and how much will they be sold for?
6. SmartWay certification
dynamics, there are certain recommendations that can be given, based on the work that
was performed here. It may seem necessary to create an accurate and detailed model of
the tractor-trailer in 3D; however with the current available technology the computational
fluid dynamics packages can handle only a limited amount of data. It is more important
to create a model that represents all the sharp edges and the general shape of the tractor-
trailer. It is also very important to verify that a mesh is created that correctly divides up
the geometry. It must be kept in mind that once the first simulation runs correctly, and is
verified/ validated, that these setup parameters must be used throughout all simulations.
It would be beneficial to use the research version of ANSYS to test the other vortex
generator designs.
device because they are simple, cheap, and can decrease drag in various applications:
REFERENCES
[3] K. R. Cooper, "Truck Aerodynamics Reborn - Lessons from the Past," in 2003 SAE
International Truck and Bus Meeting and Exhibition, Fort Worth, Texas, 2003.
[4] J. Leuschen and K. R. Cooper, "Full-Scale Wind Tunnel Tests of Production and
Bluff Tractor Trailer Body using Vortex Generators," Vols. SAE 2013-01-2458,
2013.
[6] R. M. Wood and S. X. Bauer, "Simple and Low-Cost Aerodynamic Drag Reduction
[8] United States Environmental Protection Agency, "USEPA SmartWay Trailer and
February 2015.
81
[9] United States Environmental Protection Agency, "Interim Test Method for
2012.
http://www3.epa.gov/smartway/forpartners/technology.htm. [Accessed 31 10
2015].
Available:
https://engineering.purdue.edu/~andrisan/Courses/AAE190_Fall_2001/twnvgs.pdf.
2004.
2002.
heavy vehicles," Int. J. Heavy Vehicle Systems, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 355-370, 2012.
[20] D. Such, N. Katzir and G. Hoffmann, "Improved Vortex Generator CFD model for
[21] Peterbilt Motors Corporation, Heavy Duty Body Builder Manual, March 2015 Rev
A.
[22] Great Dane Trailers, "Dry Freight Trailers," 12 06 2015. [Online]. Available:
http://www.greatdanetrailers.com/champion-se.
83
[24] Peterbilt Motors Company, "On Highway - 579," 10 06 2015. [Online]. Available:
http://www.peterbilt.com/products/on-highway/579/.