Rear spoilers and safety?

I think you should take a closer look at the spoilers on specifically 2nd
and 3rd gen Integras - I've never looked closely at a Civic one but expect
it'll be the same. They *do* have an airfoil cross section... an upside
down wing. Even if there is a small amount of wing drag, they can be used
to route and smooth airflow off the back of the car to reduce the effect of
the turbulence pocket which exists behind any moving vehicle... thus
pushing the turbulence far enough behind the vehicle, that it has little
direct effect on it. Every aero device an a racing car has a lift:drag
ratio - the trick is to get the ratio as large as possible in scale with
the vehicle dynamics. People get paid a lot of money to do just that.

So what? Auto mfrs have been selling the racing look for donkeys' ages.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

Utterly clueless as usual. If you are ignorant of the facts why do you
continue to insist on letting off your brain farts?

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

Neither do I, but what makes you thing those stupid things put on
production cars are racing appendages? There's a big difference
between the inverted airfoil devices put way up in the air on racing
sportscars and the no-particular-profile swoopty-doo cosmetic affairs
one finds in a dealer's showroom. It's very doubtful the latter ever
saw a wind tunnel and I very much doubt the racers make use of them.

 

The one on my GSR wasn't an airfoil, inverted or otherwise. I had a
good look at it after I took the silly thing off.

Not that I can make out, with the exception of a type R

Can be. Are they? As I said, let's see the wind tunnel results.

Sure. But were they for production economy cars?
Or did the money get paid to the artists in the styling department?

And they're a joke, like those 1960's fins.

 

Wait, you mean Bernouli, don't you. He was Swiss, you know. Yet
another Mike Hunt Phact (TM).

For the record, I think that it is extremely likely that even if Jakob
had never been born we would still be flying in 747s now.

And to complete the hat trick of Mike Hunt Phacts (TM), please show us
how Bernouli's equation proves you can't generate down force at less
than 150 mph.

 

Daniel Bournelli was the one who advanced theories about fluid velocities
and pressures that became known as the Bournelli Effect.

Jakob was his uncle and mathematician. He might have had some impact on the
design of a 747.

Since none of the Bernoulli brothers and sons was Italian, it must be
someone else that Mike Huint was referring to.

 

I said "racing inspired". How far an airfoil is "up in the air" is usually
adjustable on a track by track basis depending on low/high downforce reqts.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

Both my '92 and '99 Integras (GS) have an airfoil cross-section: flat on
the top, thicker at the front than at the rear. Not optimally shaped I'm
sure but....

That's a ridiculous request - knowing that I can't provide it. IMO, by
their shape, they work; whether they work enough to make a noticable
difference is not that important.

You're entitled to your opinion but the 1960's fins had no function, even
pretended, at all.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

As in 'boy racer'.

Seen any that are only 4 inches wide and placed within a couple of
inches of the trunk lid?

Face it George, we're talking apples and oranges here.
There are racing wings and there are production car spoilers.
The former is a racing accessory, the latter a cosmetic conceit.

 

Different purpose. In a coupe style body there is a lot of turbulence at
the trailing edge of the rear screen a spoiler can help to smooth that
out. Two inches probably not but the RealTime Integras did not have a wing
way up in the air. There *are* practical aspects here too, for everyday
driving.

So do you feel happier about the RSX factory wing?... about the same height
as the RealTime version?

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

As I said, let's see your wind tunnel results.
You see practicality, I see styling. Some drag figures from a wind
tunnel run would settle our differences quickly.

Haven't examined it, but I'll tell you what I'd look for.
1. width 8 inches or more
2. curved underside with thicker material on the leading edge
3. concave rather than just flat upper side with a high, thin trailing
edge.

Are you familiar with the term 'angle of attack' with respect to
airfoils? It applies to racing wings too. The lack of an appropriate
angle on a pretend wing is a dead give away. Only a F1 or Indy car on
a very fast track runs a wing at a shallow angle of attack.

 

And I've already answered that - find them if you can.

Go check out the photos... search at Google.

As already noted, the Integra wings have 2 - not a lot but sufficient to
create a low pressure area where it's needed. Concave upper surface is
unnecessary; thin trailing edge is too fragile for production cars.

Yes, angle of attack can be used to a *limited* extent in racing... unless
you want a drag inducer like a Handford device. If you don't need a lot of
downforce, which a production car doesn't, and don't have spare power to
counter the drag for optimal circuit performance, the airfoil shape is
sufficient.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

Must be used, or no downforce. And the slower the speeds, the greater
the angle of attack must be to generate any appreciable effect at all.

Sufficient to look racy...

 

Sure, started reading about it in the 70's, IIRC, when the F1 crowd got
serious about aerodynamics.

Well, DUH!

You keep asking George to post some wind tunnel data, how about you post
one or more URLs to support your claims?

 

I'm not making claims so much as I am raising questions. As I remarked
to George, some genuine wind tunnel data would settle the issue, but
my suspicion is that there isn't any such data because the average
production car spoiler is cosmetic and no aerodynamic effect was ever
intended. Nobody in the styling department bothers with aerodynamics,
their job is gee-whizz appearance and you now find spoilers on
four-door econoboxes that have all the handling characteristics of a
supermarket grocery cart.

 

Huh? You think the body designers at major mfrs don't employ aero? Try
getting a job in the "styling dept." without serious aero qualifications.
Hell "aero" is like a required tack on to any engineering degree if you
have aspirations to work in any sector of the auto industry, from racing
cars to golf carts. Many universties cater to this by offering degrees in,
e.g. Mechanical Engineering & Aerodynamics. Do you also think the rear
diffuser on the TSX is "cosmetic"?

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

A very small angle of attack can help to optimize the airflow to the rear
of a spoiler/wing. The main "lift" comes from the shape though. Take a
look at the current crop of LMP cars (nice analyses at
http://www.mulsannescorner.com/): rear wings look horizontal from the usual
spectator/TV perspective - you'd need to get real close with a spirit level
to be really sure - and wickerbills (Gurney Flaps) are added for high
downforce tracks.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

This tells me all I need to know, thanks.

 

Yes

 

is that there isn't any such data

Show me different.