Centro Interdipartimentale di Fluidodinamica e Idraulica Universit di Udine

Aerodynamic analysis of a two-man bobsleigh

A.Soldati, S. Filippi, G. Miclet, M. Campolo, M. Andreoli, G. Moretti

Sport Aerodynamics- CISM course Udine, 3-7 September 2007

A typical bobsleigh race from inside!

the track
Torino, Italy, Cesana Pariol track, 2006 Winter Olympics Course length: 1,435 m Difference in height : 114 m Bends: 19 Push off stretch Starting area Main track Decelerating area Finish line

the importance of men & bob aerodynamics

From 0 to 40 km/h

Average speed: 50-110 km/h Top speed: 140 km/h

and typical performances

What can we do to go faster?

Motivation and Objectives

1. Evaluate aerodynamic performances (drag and lift forces) of italian team two-man bobsleigh using numerical analysis
2. Identify and test design modifications which may improve aerodynamic performances

Steps of work

CFD optimization & Virtual testing

Reverse engineering CAD model Meshing technique CFD model CFD solver Performance index

Model 1, , Model n

Scaled Prototype & Wind tunnel testing

Full scale Prototype & field testing

Multidisciplinary team
University of Udine
Coordination (G. Miclet) Fluid dynamic analysis/optimization (A. Soldati) Reverse engineering/fast prototyping (S. Filippi)

Technical consultancy
Design Rule/Constraint (I. Ferriani, Nazionale Italiana Bob)

Technical partners
Reverse engineering/Prototyping (MarMax, UD) RANS CFD solver (CD Adapco, TO)

Research cooperation
Aerodynamical optimization (M.V. Salvetti, UNIPI) Wind tunnel tests (G. Gibertini, PoliMi) Carbon/Kevlar shells (CS Canoe, PN)

1. From real object to design: reverse engineering

Virtual Italian 2-men bobsleigh

Pilot Brakeman Wings

Chute Nose

Bumpers

2. Virtual model: check of allowed dimensions (FIBT rules)

Shape optimization of shell will be constrained by external vincula!

3. Discretization for CFD analysis

TARGET:

1. simulate the flow around the bobsleigh 2. evaluate the forces (drag/lift) acting on the solid surface

ASSUMPTIONS:

1. Steady state 2. Ideal gas 3. Turbulent flow (k-epsilon model + wall treatment)

4. Computational domain & boundaries

Free shear/wall outlet

Simulation data Box dimensions (4.5m x 2.5m x 1.5m) Height from bottom: 50 mm Air relative velocity: 39 m/s (140 Km/h) Wall velocity: 39 m/s (140 Km/h)

Straight track
Inlet

Bends

5. Results: velocity field & streamlines

From qualitative analysis of flow

 to quantitative evaluation of forces!

Pressure/shear distribution over surface Drag: 121 N (pressure) + 21.8 N (shear) (Lift : 320.4 N)

Identification of critical regions

Need ideas to improve design? Look at competitors!

World championship 07 (Cortina dAmpezzo, Italy)

Observation 1: bobsleights have variable distances from bottom wall

USA

GERMANY
High h (70 mm)

RUSSIA Low h (50 mm)

Airfoil

Bobsleight International rules: h 100 mm

Can we exploit any ground effect to improve performances?

Simulation results: Higher distance smaller drag

h=50 mm

Speed

140 km/h drag lift 320.4 303.7

H=50 mm H=70 mm

142.9 137.7

h=70 mm

- 4%

- 5%

but drag reduction is not significant!

Observation 2: bobsleights have variable nose shapes

ITALIA Rounded nose

GERMANY Triangular nose

USA

Pentagonal nose

Best performing!*
*Ref.: Advanced bobsleigh design: Part 2, aerodynamic modifications to a two-man bobsleigh, by F Motallebi, P Dabnichki* and D Luck, Department of Engineering, Queen Mary, University of London, London, UK

Restart from good design to make it better: evaluation of German bobsleigh

Reverse engineering from sequence of photos

Italian vs German bobsleigh

ITALIA

Nose shape

Bumpers and wings

Shell curvature & Men position

GERMANY

Computational domain & boundaries

outlet Simulation data Box dimensions (4.5m x 2.5m x 1.5m) Height from bottom: 70 mm Air relative velocity: 39 m/s (140 Km/h) Wall velocity: 39 m/s (140 Km/h) Straight track

Free shear/wall

GER

ITA

Inlet

Bends

Results: velocity field & streamlines

Streamline comparison
H=70 mm, v=140km/h

GER

ITA

 and quantitative evaluation of forces!

Pressure/shear distribution over surface Drag: 113 N (pressure) + 19.8 N (shear) (Lift : 165.7 N)

Identification of critical regions

Comparison of performances

h=50 mm

Speed

140 km/h drag lift 320.4 303.7 167.7

H=50 mm H=70 mm H=70 mm

142.9 137.7 133.8

h=70 mm h=70 mm

but we know we can do better!

 other design modifications implemented

Shape of wings

Chute
Aerodynamic profile of shell Better shape

Rounded boumpers Flat bottom Rounded boumpers

 and final result!

Still to be tested in lab to confirm results of CFD simulations in the field to win next bob championship