GENERAL SIR JOHN KOTELAWALA DEFENCE UNIVERSITY

PROJECT PROPOSAL FOR

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENT LONG TRUCK
ROOF FAIRING SHAPES USING CFD SIMULATIONS

BY

W. A. I. S. JAYAWARDANA
T. H. D. D. WIJERATHNE
H. D. WICKRAMASINGHE

SUPERVISED BY
MR. SLMD RANGAJEEWA

DEPARTMENT OF AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING

OCTOBER 2017
TABLE OF CONTENT

LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................................ ii

ACRONYMS .................................................................................................................................................. iii
1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 1
2. PROBLEM STATEMENT .............................................................................................................................. 2
3. RESEARCH QUESTION ............................................................................................................................... 2
4. AIM & OBJECTIVE ...................................................................................................................................... 2
5. LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................................................. 3
6. SELECTION OF THE PRIME MOVER ........................................................................................................... 8
7. SELECTION OF ROOF FAIRINGS ................................................................................................................. 9
8. METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................................................... 10
1.Solid Modelling ................................................................................................................................... 11
2. Mesh Generation ................................................................................................................................. 11
3. CFD Simulations ................................................................................................................................. 11
4. Analysis............................................................................................................................................... 11
8. TIME PLAN............................................................................................................................................... 13
9. EXPECTED OUTCOME .............................................................................................................................. 13
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................ 14

i
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: wind deflector samples .................................................................................................. 10

Figure 2: Aerodynamic Analysis for long truck with an air deflector .......................................... 12

Figure 3: Time plan ..................................................................................................................... 133

ii
ACRONYMS

• CO2 – Carbon Dioxide

• km/h- kilometers per hour

• CoE- Cabin over Engine

• CFD- Computational Fluid Dynamics

• 3D- three dimensional

• CATIA - Computer Aided Three-dimensional Interactive Application

• FOAM - Field Operation and Manipulation

iii
1. INTRODUCTION

Long trucks have become a major commercial transportation vehicle in the recent past. In a
profit basis business, it is essential to maintain a low cost to have a profitable outcome. Long trucks
such as prime movers have the capability to attach a trailer and carry more load at once which will
reduce the cost by decreasing the number of trucks for the total distribution. Due to the heavy
weight and the huge structure long trucks are subjected to heavy drag. Aerodynamic drag
contributes largely to the total drag of a long truck.

Aerodynamic drag is the air resistance against a moving object in the opposite direction.
Aerodynamic drag can be considered as for two types,

• Pressure drags
• Skin friction drag

In a long truck, frontal area is relatively larger than other common land vehicles used in the
world. Due to that it is already subjected to a larger pressure drag. Apart from that when it uses a
taller trailer behind the prime mover (or tractor), frontal area of the trailer also subjected to pressure
drag which will increase the total drag further. To overcome this drag, Engines need to create more
thrust which will lead to more fuel consumption.

According to the records of users fuel cost contributes the most in life cycle cost of a long
truck. So that long truck manufacturers have been researching for several solutions to reduce the
fuel cost by reducing the aerodynamic drag. By the time they have already implemented several
strategies for tractor and trailer separately such as,

• Aero Bumpers, Aero mirrors, Fuel tank side fairings, Roof fairings mainly for the tractor
and,
• Boat tail, Trailer side fairings low rolling resistance tires for the trailer.

Most commonly used aerodynamic drag reduction improvement which is implemented on the
tractor is the roof fairing or roof spoiler. These roof spoilers come in different shapes and with
different dimensions. In this research, researchers are expecting to analyze 3 roof fairing shapes

1
selected from the roof fairings that are commonly used in Sri Lanka. Researchers will be using
computational fluid dynamics(CFD) simulations format to carry out this research.

Considering the usage in Sri Lanka, researchers have selected the DAF CF 75 sleeper cabin
prime mover as the exemplary truck. Selected truck is capable of fixing a separate fairing which
is an essential requirement in the research.

We also have decided to select 3 model roof fairings in aid to test three shapes which are
commonly used in Sri Lanka. Namely,

1. CF-1643
2. Mercedes Atego 816
3. Iveco Stralis

2. PROBLEM STATEMENT

Identifying the roof fairing shape which provides the most effective aerodynamic drag
reduction in a long truck.

3. RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the most effective drag reduction roof fairing shape of the selected roof fairings?

4. AIM & OBJECTIVE

Our main aim is to identify the most effective roof fairing design that is used commonly in Sri
Lanka on a long truck using CFD simulation analysis. In order to achieve successfully that we
have established several objectives that we need to complete during our process.

1. Using CFD simulations to examine the pressure drag which affects the long truck without
a roof fairing and with each roof fairing.
2. Plot velocity versus Cd (Coefficient of Drag) graphs for each roof fairing.

3. Identifying essential parameters to analyze efficiency of roof fairing shapes of a long truck.

4. Compare each roof fairing based on identified parameters to select the most effective drag
reduction roof fairing.

2
5. LITERATURE REVIEW

Systematic analysis of heavy vehicle fluid flow characteristics and getting information
regarding the performance of the long vehicle based on the aerodynamics has a vital practical
significance in the aspects of fuel economy, driving stability and environmental factors such as
greenhouse gas emission. (Choi et al., 2014)

The emission of CO2 has risen by 28% caused by the transporting methods including rail
sea and road vehicles. It has been projected that this trend will continue to grow more and more
which can affect environmental pollution. Heavy trucks which weighs over 16 tons have been
emitting about 5% of all European CO2. Heavy fuel consumption of heavy vehicles causes more
CO2 emission so it is essential to identify methods to lower fuel consumption and one way of doing
that is by reducing the Aerodynamic drag of heavy vehicles. When a vehicle is travelling under
highway speeds and conditions, it has been found that nearly 40% of a vehicle fuel was consumed
to overcome the aerodynamic drag and it can be reduced by implementing aerodynamic drag
reduction devices or rearranging the vehicle structure accordingly. (Frank & Turney, 2016)

Large trucks are bluff bodies when it moves, it should push away large mass of air because
of that truck subjected to enormous drag force. It is estimated that a typical long truck vehicle with
an average drag coefficient of 0.6 and driving at 70 miles per hour (112.7 km/h) spends 65% of its
fuel to overcome aerodynamic drag. Aerodynamic drag remains the focal point of a vehicle’s
aerodynamic because reducing the drag contributes expressively to fuel economy and emission
reduction. (Das et al., 2013)

When analyzing the performance of heavy vehicles in average highway speeds,

experiments shows that 65% of fuel used in journey, used for overcoming the air resistance and
reduction of drag can leads to a large reduction in cost approximately 12%. (National Aeronautics
and Space Administration, 2003)

Average thermal efficiency of a truck is around 33% (M.J. Bradley & Associates 2009)
and 85% of the useful energy of the engines directly used for bearing the rolling resistance and the
and aerodynamic losses while it takes a negligible amount for gravity and inertia. (U.S. Department
of Energy, 2000).

3
 A 4% of fuel saving can achieve by 20% reduction in drag in high speeds around 104 km/h.
the highest drag of 21% occurs due to aerodynamic losses of the heavy truck while rolling
resistance of tires gives only 13% losses therefore main aspect for the development is considered
as reduction in air resistance drag loss. (M.J. Bradley ,2009)

The energy produced by the truck engine which use for overcoming the aerodynamic drag
is affected by the speed of the vehicle, shape of the overall vehicle and effective frontal surface
area of the cabin, streamline shape of the truck is less in drag because of its flow separation is less
dramatic and wake is less. (Curry et al., 2012)

Manufacturers continuous attention on different drag reduction techniques, the overall drag
coefficient is taken from 0.8(1970) to 0.65 today. There is a reasonable possibility to reduce the
drag by further 20% and calculations show that 10% reduction of drag causes nearly 5.5%
reduction in fuel cost saving at average speeds. They also highlight the important role of the
external fairings and the potential of growth is mainly via a development of efficient fairings
systems which covers the critical gaps that causes high aerodynamic drag in a heavy vehicle.
(environmental protection agency US, 2002)

Proper computational fluid flow analysis is highlighted because local manufactures who
modify the fairings in Asian countries such as Bangladesh and Pakistan without considering the
aerodynamic aspects lead to high fuel consumption and drag. (Chowdhury et al., 2016)

In quantitative form, researchers found that there is an approximately 1.7 billion reductions
in fuel wastage for a reduction of 50% of the drag. (Englar, 2001).

In regulations, truck-trailer combination has different nomenclatures according to the

country it performs. In identification of the overall length, in north America, it doesn’t restrict the
overall length of the truck. But in Europe it restricts overall length including the cabin and trailer.
Therefore, it is highly recommended to manufacture compact cabins to minimize the length. That
increases the frontal area and the drag while US trucks give a high aerodynamic advantage. Special
consideration need to be there when designing fairing systems for this. These cabins are also called

4
“cabin over engine” cabins and need extra fairing systems and aerodynamic features to reduce the
drag. In designing roof fairings, it is must to consider Windscreen rake, corner radii, wedge angle,
roof shape of the CoE cabin. (Hjelm & Bergqvist, 2007)

The nomenclature for the ground clearance is defined as “C” and in most of the trucks, it
is maintained at C/W =0.36-0.50 and span wise width is named as “w” in experimental definitions.
(Allan 1981, Storms et al. 2004)

The distance between rear wall and the cabin is named as “G” and distance between top of
the roof and top of the trailer is named as “H” in law regulations and design nomenclatures. This
height “H” is more important in roof fairing design. Because of this height regulations, adjustable
roof fairings are more common in Europe to match the trailer height they are using. (Hjelm &
Bergqvist, 2007)

Analysis of tractor and trailer becomes complicated than commercial airplanes, ships and
submarines because of the phenomenon of airflow around the ground is with massive flow
separation and high amount of turbulence. (Ahmed et al. 1985)

It consists of two rectangular bluff bodies fixed in tandem mode closer to the ground which
gives some complex practical flows such as gap flow between cabin and the trailer, multiple
stagnation points, underbody turbulent flow with rolling tires and large wake region with high
amount of drag. (Buil & Herrer 2009, Cooper 2003, Wood 2006, Wood & Bauer 2003)

High level of ground clearance in heavy trucks cause a less consideration in ground effect
but the flow separation from rolling tires is a huge area which should consider when analyzing the
fluid flow in vehicle. They make a pair of counterrotating longitudinal vortices behind the tire.
(McManus & Zhang 2006, Mercker & Bernerburg 1992, Pirozzoli et al. 2012).

In tractor trailer configuration, aerodynamic drag occurs mainly due to shape of the cabin,
transition gap between tractor, underbody of the truck and rear edge of the trailer (Curry et al.,
2012)

5
 The tractor (cabin) and trailer should be considered together since it has been revealed
through wind tunnel and CFD calculations that total drag of the semi-trailer combination is lower
than when those were considered separately. But this was carried out in a one particular system so
results may vary with other systems. (Frank & Turney, 2016)

The cabin should be aerodynamically shaped and recommends having a smooth transition
between the top of the cabin and top of the trailer using any height matching mechanism to create
a smooth flow line between two. (U.S. Department of Energy,2000)

To reduce more aerodynamic drag it is useful to have a special combination of dimension

in the basic cab. Cab width, cab height, cab length, corner radius, sweep, side tapering and
windshield angle all are contributing to the aerodynamic drag so it is useful to understand the
connection between these geometries by carrying out a parametric study. (Frank & Turney, 2016)

Earlier developments for the drag reduction are increasing radius of the edges and corners
and smoothing fairing systems for blunt edges via these systems approximately 20% of fuel saving
is achieved at full-scale test on highway conditions. (Wood,2006)

After the first oil crisis researchers focused their attention more on smoothing the gap of
tractor top and trailer top. Because of it, most of the trucking companies adopted smooth fairing
systems. (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2003)

These fairings systems include roof fairing system, side fairing system and side extenders
to stop the gap flow between cabin and trailer, aerodynamic side mirrors and vortex generators.
(Curry et al., 2012)

Aerodynamic drag can reduce by fixing aerodynamic tools such as a wind deflector on the
roof of the truck cabin, using a six-panel vortex trap at annular space between truck and trailer,
attaching a vortex stake at an angle of 300 at the rear end of the trailer, providing a mini-skirt (MS)
device at the trailer undercarriage and extending the frame of tailor called aerodynamic revolute
(Chilbule et al., 2014)

6
 Among the devises developed to overcome the drag occurred due to gap between trailer
top and the cabin top, Roof fairing (Roof deflector, cabin deflector) plays a major role. It directs
the airflow smoothly over the top of the cabin and body of the trailer. (Cooper 2003, Leuschen &
Cooper 2009, Malviya et al., 2009).

Most of the early age developments of roof fairings based on the experiments on the wind
tunnels. Some of the complex flow patterns of tractor trailer combination can now easily simulate
by using modern super computers, work stations and CFD software. (National Aeronautics and
Space Administration, 2003)

Computation Fluid Dynamics is known as an art of restoring the integral or the partial
derivatives in equation with discretized algebraic forms, which in turn are resolved to find out
numbers for the flow field values at discrete points in time. CFD is a quantitative explanation of
problem. CFD can deal with the nonlinear equations of momentum, energy without restoring to
any geometrical or physical rough calculation. (Anderson, 2010)

As it would take lot of time to perform these tests manually, CFD simulations allows to
obtain performance data of the aerodynamic part, CFD is used to analyzing lift and drag, because
these two data can be obtained by the simulation used in subsequent design and analysis. (Gibson
et al., 2008)

To overcome some of the difficulties associated with wind tunnel testing an on-road
measurement, researches have invented computerized simulation techniques, with advanced
capabilities of CFD provide detailed insight into flow structure around the vehicle but some results
shows that CFD faces issues when it predicts truck drag coefficient with accuracy and
repeatability. This issue has its root in the highly turbulent flow-field around the truck. (Khondge
et al., 2004)

Considering all the aerodynamic drag reduction technologies, implementing a roof fairing
system solely make a fuel saving of 2% of fuel liters per 100km at the speed of 97 km/h. when

7
adjusted to 70km/h it gives a percentage saving of 1% and annual savings of 589 liters. (Bustnes,
2005)

Tractor trailer vehicles sometimes need to travel in roads with curvatures at that time it
makes a yaw angle. When it analyses only with the roof fairing, flow behavior with a yaw angle it
shows a peak at zero yaw angle. It produces largest drag reduction of approximately 20%. Before
and after that with yaw angle increases drag reduction percentage decreases. (Annual Review of
Fluid Mechanics, 2014)

Aerodynamics also contributes to other phenomena such as thermal management, self or

foreign soiling, aero acoustics, styling and ergonomics. Soiling can be described as getting
splashes of dirt from a foreign vehicle which travels in front of the considering vehicle or getting
dirt, which sprays comes out from the own vehicle. Aero acoustics means reducing the sound or
noise which emits from a travelling vehicle. If drag reduction improvisation causes sound pollution
it isn’t a good improvisation after all. Styling means the basic shape of a heavy truck which will
fluctuate with several aspects rather than aerodynamics. It is critical to have a proper shape to have
a successful sale in the market. Ergonomics concern about practical considerations of human
service which is needed during the service. As an example, driver needs sufficient space inside the
truck to have a proper ride. (Frank & Turney, 2016)

6. SELECTION OF THE PRIME MOVER

Selection of prime mover for the research is based on the criteria of most commonly usage
In Sri Lanka., road situations and the average distance and time taken for a single delivery. Road
observations and discussions with industry worker’s experience it’s clear that DAF CF series is
the most vulnerable category for our prime mover. CF series consists of three types of engine over
cabin type models based on their cabin space. They are CF65 day cabin for very short-range day
travels, CF 75 sleeper cabin for medium range average time travels and CF 85 sleeper cabin with
two bunks and high accommodation space for driver and co-driver with capability of high distance
travels which take more than a day.

8
Sri Lanka is a country where it takes maximum one day for a single cargo travel because it doesn’t
consist of long distances routes such as Europe, US or any other country with large geographical
area. Therefore, its ideal to select CF 75 Sleeper cabin model’s aerodynamic features for our
baseline lorry model. This Manufacturer is originally a Netherland manufacturer who is still using
direct production techniques than outsourcing, and Sri Lankan industry owners are more attracted
towards its after sales services and availability of spare parts. Therefore, this become the most
common brand and model in Sri Lanka.

Most of the Sri Lankan freight services and related industries are located near sea level areas rather
than going to the up country. Engine type and the power variations of the CF75 is considered and
recommended by operators for the low country operations as the optimum type than going to a low
power less efficient way or high-power cost consuming way.

DAF CF 75 Aerodynamic features are much simple and able to easily extract for solid modeling
for our flow simulation processes than complex geometrical shapes. Manufacturer also a user-
friendly organization which provides dimensions and blue prints for the developers and vehicle
body builders without distractions.

7. SELECTION OF ROOF FAIRINGS

Roof fairing is used to get a more aerodynamic shape in truck cabin. There is a height gap between
the cabin and trailer, so full height roof fairings create a smooth transition from the windshield to
the full height of the trailer. For the sleeper cabins manufacturer make the fairing shape as it has
integrated with a sleeping compartment. But for day cabins fairing is an additional part that can be
mounted on the top of the roof. DAF CF 75 is a day cab, research is about test three shapes of
fairings that can be attached to the cabin and find out which shape helps to reduce the aerodynamic
drag and increase the fuel economy.

Three shapes that are going to be tested,

1. CF-1643
2. Mercedes Atego 816
3. Iveco Stralis

9
 i. CF-1643 ii. Mercedes Atego 816 iii. Iveco Stralis

Figure 1: wind deflector samples

8. METHODOLOGY

Aerodynamic behavior of the long truck with each roof fairing will be the main consideration
during this research. The truck was selected by the researchers based on the common usage in Sri
Lanka. Roof fairings were selected among 3 different commercial manufacturers to get their
unique characteristics in designing the roof fairings.

3D model for the selected vehicle will be designed first and 3D models of each roof fairing will
be fixed on top of the cabin model. Roof fairings will be scaled precisely to cabin model
dimensions. CFD simulations will be done with 3 different velocities,

• 30 km/h- Average speed in city

• 60 km/h- Speed limit out of city

• 100km/h-Highway speed limit

Research will be conducted in four phases to accomplish its main objective.

1. Solid modelling

2. Mesh Generation

3. CFD simulations

4. Analysis

10
1.Solid Modelling

solid models of the prime mover and for selected roof fairings will be created ahead of the
simulations. SolidWorks software will be preferred primarily for the designing of the long truck.
Dimensions extracted from the blue print of the selected prime mover will be used to create the
3D model of the prime mover. Roof fairings will be scaled and model precisely to the prime mover
dimensions. CATIA software will be used in designing fairing parts.

2. Mesh Generation

A mesh will be developed in order to carry out the CFD simulations. Gmesh generator and gambit
will be used to generate the mesh during the process.

3. CFD Simulations

Once the meshing is done, CFD software compatibility of the mesh will be tested ANSYS Fluent
or OpenFOAM software are the selected platforms to use for simulation tasks. Model will be
created and meshed using unit millimeters(mm). All the models, materials and boundary
conditions will be determined later.

4. Analysis

After the test results are achieved analyzing will be done in a comprehensive manner to identify
the most efficient roof fairing. A parametric study will be carried out on each roof fairing to
identify what aspects have affected the test results and will finally decide what roof fairing has the
most effective design model out of all.

11
 Creating Solid Model

Mesh Generation

Aerodynamic analysis of a
long tuck

CFD Simulation

Data Analyzing

Postprocessing

Developing graphs
and sketches

Creating Solid Model

Mesh Generation
Aerodynamic analysis of a
long truck with an air
deflector
CFD Simulation

Data Analyzing

Postprocessing

Developing graphs
and sketches

Figure 2: Aerodynamic Analysis for long truck with an air deflector

12
8. TIME PLAN

Figure 3: Time plan

9. EXPECTED OUTCOME

➢ Coefficient of drag graphs for the truck without a roof fairing and with each roof fairing
shape.
➢ Comparison between each roof fairing shape in drag reduction based on graphical results.
➢ Analysis of the effect due to the scaling of each roof fairing for the prime mover roof size.
➢ Analysis of the aerodynamic behavior of the long truck with each roof fairing.
➢ Identify the most effective roof fairing shape from the selected shapes.

13
REFERENCES

1. Ahmed SR, Gawthorpe, RG, Mackrodt PA. (1985). Aerodynamics of road and rail vehicles.
Vehicle System Dynamics 14:319-92
2. Anderson, J. (2011). Fundamentals of aerodynamics. 5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, p.174.
3. Buil, RM, Herrer LC. (2009). Aerodynamic analysis of a vehicle tanker. J. Fluids Eng.
131:041204
4. Bustnes, O.E. (2005). Taking on the Leadership Challenge in Class 8 Trucking: How to
Double Class 8 Truck Efficiency Profitably. Rocky Mountain Institute Presentation.
5. Chilbule, C., Upadhyay, A. and Mukkamala, Y. (2014). Analyzing the profile modification of
truck-trailer to prune the aerodynamic drag and its repercussion on fuel consumption. Tamil
Nadu.
6. Cooper, KR. (2003). Truck aerodynamics reborn: lessons from the past. SAE Pap. 2003-01-
3376, SAE Int., Warrendale, PA.
7. Curry, T., Liberman, I., Hoffmann-Andrews, L. and Lowell, D. (2012). Reducing Aerodynamic
Drag & Rolling Resistance from Heavy-Duty Trucks: Summary of Available Technologies &
Applicability to Chinese Trucks. Manchester: M.J. Bradley & Associates LLC.
8. Das, P., Tsubokora, M., Matsuki, T., Oshima, N. and Kitoh, K. (2013). Large Eddy Simulation
of the Flow-Field around a Full-Scale Heavy-Duty Truck. [online] Sciencedirect.com.
Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877705813005092
[Accessed 3rd Oct. 2017].
9. En.wikipedia.org. (2017). Aerodynamic drag. [online] Available at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerodynamic_drag [Accessed 5th Oct. 2017].
10. Englar, R. (2001). Advanced Aerodynamic Devices to Improve the Performance, Economics,
Handling and Safety of Heavy Vehicles. Technical. Washington, D.C.: SAE, pp.1-6.
11. Frank, T. and Turney, J. (2016). Aerodynamics of Commercial Vehicles. In: A. Dillmann and
A. Orellano, ed., The Aerodynamics of Heavy Vehicles III, 79th ed. Springer, pp.196-210.
12. Gibson, J., Murray, K., Tucker, S., Klingerman, R., Allison, J. and Langerquist, S. (2008). SAE
Aero Design Final Report. Florida: Florida Institute of Technology.
13. Khondge, A., Sovani, S., Lokhande, D., Jain, S., Sunil, K. and Long, M. (2004). Simulation of
the flow- field around a generic tractor-trailer truck. Technical. SAE.

14
14. Leuschen J., Cooper KR. (2009). Summary of full-scale wind tunnel tests of aerodynamic drag-
reducing devices for tractor-trailers
15. M.J. Bradley & Associates (2009). Setting the Stage for Regulation of Heavy Duty Vehicle
Fuel Economy & GHGE missions: Issues and Opportunities. International Council on Clean
Transportation Report.
16. Malviya V., Mishra R., Fieldhouse J. (2009). CFD investigation of a novel fuel-saving device
for articulated tractor-trailer combinations. Eng. Appl. Computational Fluid Mechanics.
3:587-607
17. McManus J., Zhang X. (2006). A computational study of the flow around an isolated wheel in
contact with the ground. J. Fluids Eng. 128:520-30
18. Mercker E., Bernerburg H. (1992). On the simulation of road driving of a passenger car in a
wind tunnel using a moving belt and rotating wheels. Presented at International Conference
Innov, Reliab. 3rd. Florence, France.
19. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (2003). Reducing Aerodynamic Drag. Truck
Aerodynamics. National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
20. Pirozzoli S., Orlandi P., Bernardini M. (2012). The fluid dynamics of rolling wheels at low
Reynolds number. J. Fluid Eng. Mechanical. 706:496-533
21. Science Learning Hub. (2011). Causes of aerodynamic drag. [online] Available at:
https://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/resources/1346-causes-of-aerodynamic-drag [Accessed 4th
Oct. 2017].
22. Tc.gc.ca. (2017). Review of Aerodynamic Drag Reduction Devices for Heavy Trucks and Buses
- Transport Canada. [online] Available at: https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/programs/environment-
etv-menu-eng-2939.html [Accessed 4th Oct. 2017].
23. Wood, RM. (2006). A discussion of a heavy truck advanced aerodynamic trailer system.
Presented at International Symposium of Heavy Vehicle Weights Dimensions, 9th, University
Park, PA.
24. United States Department of Energy (2000). Technology Road map for the 21st Century Truck
Program a government industry research partnership. Technical Report 21CT--‐001.
25. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2002). A Glance at Clean Freight Strategies:
Improved Aerodynamics. United States Environmental Protection Agency.

15