A flow simulation on SolidWorks was used to test two potential AEV designs. Air was run across the planes that would be considered the front and back of the AEV to see how it would move as the AEV would go down the track. This was tested for the AEV moving forward and backward.
Alex Uhrich’s Design (Design 1)
Airflow from Front
Average Value: 0.0388363503346472
Airflow from Back
Average Value:-0.0313216919099417
Current Group Design (Design 2)
Airflow from Front
Average Value: 0.0240467645590914
Airflow from Back
Average Value: -0.0304369680466972
Challenges
The biggest challenge throughout this lab was figuring out how to run a simulation on SolidWorks. To solve this problem, a video on YouTube was found that provided step by step instructions on how to perform a simulation of this type which the group used after catering it to our own need [2].
Usefulness
Air was run at 5 m/s and -5 m/s to test both forwards and backwards movement. It was shown that the current group design was slightly more aerodynamic than Design 1. This can be seen as there is a smaller average value for the group design. This means there is a smaller deviation of the airflow from a straight path as the AEV moves along the track. The simulation was able to show where the air flow would deviate from a straight path and show where the air was having the most affect. Moving forward, this test could be run again to see if adding something such as an airfoil would have a greater affect on the aerodynamics of the vehicle.