Proceedings of the ASME 2013 International Mechanical Engineering Congress & Exposition

IMECE2013
November 15-21, 2013, San Diego, CA, USA

DRAFT

IMECE2013-65218

UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH ON TRAILER-TRUCK AERODYNAMIC DRAG

Mir Atiqullah
Southern Polytechnic State University
Marietta, GA, USA
Benjamin Hamler
Southern Polytechnic State University
Marietta, GA, USA

Rigoverto Sanchez
Southern Polytechnic State University
Marietta, GA, USA

ABSTRACT
The transportation industry is heavily dependent on big
rigs or semitrailers. Since its introduction during 1920s
semitrailers have revolutionized the industry. However their
geometrical designs have not evolved much to make them
aerodynamically more streamlined, thus more fuel efficient.
While over 5.6 million such commercial trailer trucks are
registered in the country and with increasing diesel fuel prices,
it is more important than ever to study their aerodynamics,
redesign for reducing aerodynamic drag and help make these
big rigs more fuel efficient. Drag is the air resistance while
moving through a fluid such as air, especially at higher speeds.
Higher drag resistance, just like road and tire resistance, causes
loss of more energy and thereby lowers fuel mileage. Drag
resistance is caused by both surface friction as well as air
pressure difference around the vehicle. An ideal remedy is of
course to completely redesign the shape and size of these
semitrailers. Another intermediate approach would be to retrofit
the existing semitrailers with devices that change the overall
shape towards more aerodynamic ones. During the recent past a
wide range of such add on devices have been introduced.
Current research was directed in two fronts: CAD and Drag
simulation as well as experimental drag testing. First a base
CAD model and then various modifications were developed
using an industry standard CAD package. These models were
then imported into Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)
software. These followed by modeling add-on devices to
reduce drag. The simulations were repeated with various
combinations of these add-on drag reducers. The areas targeted
for drag reduction study included gap between tractor and
trailer, lower sides of the trailer between front and rear wheel
sets, and rear of the trailer. The results showed varying
effectiveness of these add-on devices, individually and in
combination. Scale models of the trailer truck were built using

wood as well as Rapid Prototyping (RP) directly from CAD

using polymer. These models were then tested in the wind
tunnel at speeds between 35 and 75 miles per hour. The data
and the trends in Cd values compared well with the simulated
values. The overall CFD and scale model studies provided a
comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the drag in
semi-trailers and factors that affect it. Future studies may
expand the varieties and locations of these devices as well as
complete redesigns of the trailer-trucks.
INTRODUCTION
The shape design and then size of trailer trucks are dictated
mainly by the transportation regulation as well as efforts to
maximize the cargo capacity within size limits [8]. Thus
uniform cross sectional design that we see on the roads had
emerged.
The overwhelming importance of capacity
superseded the shape issue that is responsible for most of the
aerodynamic drag and decrease in fuel efficiency.
High cost of diesel fuel has been plaguing the
transportation industry for over half a decade. Hence there has
been a renewed focus on fuel efficiency of these large trucks.
Recent studies such as by Gotz et al. [1] Eousakul et al.,[2],and
Takeuchi et al [3] demonstrate research efforts to characterize
and design for drag reduction for various vehicles. With the
advent of computational simulation tools, this topic is also
finding attention of college students interested in vehicles and
driving who are teaming up with professors conducting
computational as well as wind tunnel experiments [4].
The drag force Fd is a function of drag coefficient Cd, air
density , air speed V, frontal area A, as given in equation (1)
Fd=Cd*(V2A)/2

(1)

Copyright 20xx by ASME

Thus drag force is linearly proportional to the velocity. In

reality the drag force increases slightly with velocity due to
change in flow conditions with speed.

constructed of wood with dimensions 3/4x3/4x10. The whole

model (with spoiler #3, attached) is shown in figure 3.

APPROACH
Since it is prohibitive to use a full scale model for testing
and it is equally inconvenient to instrument a real trailer truck,
it was decided to approach the drag study by two methods:
(1) Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)
(2) Wind Tunnel Testing.
Thus it will be possible to get results that may be compared
against each other. The intentions are to get consistent results
for Cd with change in wind speed and also to be able to
compare effectiveness of various spoiler designs on the Cd.
First a CAD model was developed of the base tractor and a
prismatic trailer. This is termed as no spoiler. Then 3 different
spoilers were designed in sequence, termed spoiler 1, spoiler
2, and spoiler 3 respectively. Spoiler 3 was the most
aerodynamic providing a smoother air flow.
These are
modeled per article by
The areas/locations of a moving trailefr truck is identified
in the following figure 1. Each area deserved investigation as
to its role in the overall drag.

Figure 3: Complete tractor-trailer model with cabin top

attachment.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Figure 1: Aerodynamic Pressure Distributions and Drag

locations (circled) in typical trailer truck. (From Richard M.
Wood et al. [22])

The base model termed as no spoiler is simulated first for

drag using computational fluid dynamics package at various
speeds between 55 and 75 miles per hour.. The typical pressure
points and wake areas as shown in figure 4 are identified and
they match well with those in figure 1.

Figure 4: Pressure points and wake areas as identified in

the base model simulation.
Figure 2: Rapid Prototyped model of the tractor
The base model tractor is shown in figure 2. Later it
was scaled down with all shapes intact to be able to fit the
model in the wind tunnel. The base trailer body was

Copyright 20xx by ASME

The drag force resulting from simulating the model with

no spoiler is shown in Figure 5. Corresponding
calculated dragcoeffcient, Cd is shown in figure 6, which
does not seems to correspond to drag force in Figure 5..

Fig xx: Scale model wind tunnel results. Drag force

almost linearly related to speed.

Fig 5: Drag force simulation. No spoiler

Various spoiler effectiveness were compared and are

shown in figure 7. Figure 8 shows drag forces in case of
using spoiler #3 at speeds ranging from40 to 80 mph.

Conclusion and Future Work

Fig 6: Drag coefficient calculated from simulated drag

force. No spoiler

The modeling effort and wind tunnel testing had

provided excellent experience of applied fluid dynamics,
CAD modeling, as well as laboratory experimentation for
the students. Their interest in this field has increased
since their achievement of satisfactory results from this
research activity. While some errors in modeling, CFD
setup and physical modeling and windtunnel calibration
remain to be resolved, overall experience is of achieving
the goal.
Future research is being planned on deployable
shapes and spoilers that may be activated in motion and
could be folded as speed reduces below a certain level.
Some research and a few patents are already available
along this concept.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors hereby acknowledge the summer stipend for
two students provided by Peach State Louis Stokes Alliance for
Minority Participations (PSLSAMP), which is funded by
national Science Foundation (NSF).
The authors also
appreciate the facility, software and hardware that were
afforded by Southern Polytechnic State University.
Fig 7: Effectiveness of various spoiler designs on Cd per
computer simulation. Adding underfins did not improve
drag. Not all of these are physically modeled.

REFERENCES

Copyright 20xx by ASME

(1) H. Gtz and G. Mayr,1998,Aerodynamic Road Vehicles,

SAE International, pp. 415-488.
(2) Mir Atiqullah and Norman Russell, 2011, Development
of a Drag Coefficient Laboratory via Capstone Design,
ASEE mid-Atlantic conference, Oct. 24-29.Temple
University, Philadelphia, PA.
(3) Subrata Roy and Pradeep Srinivasan, 2000, External
Flow Analysis of a Truck for Drag Reduction, SAE
International Conference.
(4) T. Takeuchi and I. Kohri, Development of truck and bus
aerodynamics using computational fluid dynamics, JSAE
Review, Vol. 18(2), p.188, 1997
(5) V. Eowsakul and T.J. Ortolani, Improving the
aerodynamic characteristics of a Dodge Ram pickup
truck, ASME IMECE Paper No. 97-WA/DE-18, 8p.
(6) Croll, R. H., Gutierrez, W. T., Hassan, B.,Suazo, J. E.,
and Riggins, A. J., Experimental Investigation of the
Ground Transportation Systems (GTS) Project for Heavy
Vehicle Drag Reduction, SAE paper 960907, 1996
(7) Highway Statistics 1992, p 207, US Government Printing
Office, SSOP, Washington DC 20402-9328.
(8) W.T. Mason Jr. and P.S. Beebe, The Drag Related Flow
Field Characteristics of Trucks and Buses, General
Motors research laboratories, Warren, Michigan.
(9) Bauer, P. T., Servais, R. A. (1974), An Experimental and
Analytical Investigation of Truck Aerodynamics,
Proceedings of the Conference/ Workshop on the
Reduction of the Aerodynamic Drag of Trucks, California
Institute of Technology, October 1011, National Science
Foundation RANN Document Center, Washington, D.C.,
pp. 5561.
(10) Buckley, Jr., F. T., Marks, C. H., Walston, Jr., W H.
(1974), An Assessment of Drag Reduction Techniques
Based on Observations of Flow Past Two-Dimensional
Tractor-Trailer Models, Proceedings of the
Conference/Workshop on the Reduction of the
Aerodynamic Drag of Trucks, California Institute of
Technology, October 1011, National Science
Foundation RANN Document Center, Washington, D.C.,
pp. 1531.
(11) Carr, G. W. (1967), The Aerodynamics of Basic Shapes
for Road Vehicles, Part 1, Simple Rectangular Bodies,
Motor Industry Research Association (MIRA) Report No.
I968/2, November.
(12) Cooper, K. R. (1976), Wind Tunnel Investigations of
Eight Commercially Available Devices for the Reduction
of Aerodynamic Drag on Trucks, Roads and
Transportation Association of Canada National
Conference, Quebec City, September.
(13) Fitzgerald, J. M. (1974), Field Experience Report on
Drag Reduction of the Nose Cone, Proceedings of the
Conference/Workshop on the Reduction of the
Aerodynamic Drag of Trucks, California Institute of
Technology, October 1011, National Science

Foundation RANN Document Center, Washington, D.C.,

pp. 153159.
(14) Flynn, H., Kyropoulos, P. (1962), Truck
Aerodynamics, SAE Transactions, Volume 70, pp. 297
308.
(15) Kirsch, J. W., Bettes, W. H. (1974), Feasibility Study of
the S3 Air Vane and Other Truck Drag Reduction
Devices, Proceedings of the Conference/Workshop on
the Reduction of the Aerodynamic Drag of Trucks,
California Institute of Technology, October 1011,
National Science Foundation RANNDocumentCenter,
Washington, D.C., pp. 89120.
(16) Lissaman, P.B.S. Lambie, J. H. (1974), Reduction of
Aerodynamic Drag of Large Highway Trucks,
Proceedings of the Conference/Workshop on the
Reduction of the Aerodynamic Drag of Trucks, California
Institute of Technology, October 1011, National Science
Foundation RANN Document Center, Washington, D.C.,
pp. 139151.
(17) Marks, C. H., Buckley, Jr., F. T., Walston, Jr., W. H
(1976), An Evaluation of the Aerodynamic Drag
Reductions Produced by Various Cab Roof Fairings and a
Gap Seal on Tractor-Trailer Trucks, SAE 760105,
Detroit.
(18) Mason, Jr., W. T. (1975), Wind Tunnel Development of
the Dragfoiler - A System for Reducing Tractor-Trailer
Aerodynamic Drag, SAE 750705, Seattle.
(19) Montoya, L. C., Steers, L. L. (1974), Aerodynamic Drag
Reduction Tests on a Full-Scale Tractor-Trailer
Combination with Several Add-on Devices, Proceedings
of the Conference/ Workshop on the Reduction of the
Aerodynamic Drag of Trucks, California Institute of
Technology, October 1011, National Science
Foundation RANN Document Center, Washington, D.C.,
pp. 6588.
(20) Saunders, W. S. (1966), Apparatus for Reducing Linear
and Lateral Wind Resistance in a Tractor-Trailer
Combination Vehicle, U.S. Patent No. 3, 241, 876.
(21) Sherwood, A. W. (1953), Wind Tunnel Test of
Trailmobile Trailers, University of Maryland Wind
Tunnel Report No. 85, June.
(22) Richard M. Wood and Steven X. S. Bauer, 2003, Simple
and Low-Cost Aerodynamic Drag Reduction Devices for
Tractor-Trailer Trucks, Paper No. 2003-01-3377, SAE
International.
(23) Muirhead, V. U., 1981, An Investigation of Drag
Reduction for Tractor Trailer Vehicles with Air
Deflectors and Boattail. NASA CR-163104.

Copyright 20xx by ASME