Lally Nose cone

Comment by Sakamoto on June 5, 2011 at 19:08

Have to send Andy a pic...lol. Looks unreal, Stu.

Comment by Mr Long on June 5, 2011 at 19:35

I have a couple of questions for you. (i don't know if my other message went through).

Q1. How did this pass tech at Bathurst when it looks like it would cut you in half.

Q2. How does this nose aero compare with the Sakamoto Areo Kit that we find on the Sturge Boards.

I am thinking of replicating the Lally shape out of alloy with a rubber nose similar to your design and putting them on my periferal luge. It seemed to work well and ride fast when we rode it at BTB.

Your design sees the aero sit on top of the trucks and wheels where this design sees the aero sit in front of the wheels. This design i think would be better for wheel size changes. ( we do tend to mix this up a bit).

Also i crash on a regular basis and a carbon aero would get broken on a regular basis. i recon i could panel beat the alloy cones out or maybe they would be tougher.

Your thoughts?

Stu.

 

Premium Member Comment by Grits on June 5, 2011 at 23:21

I like your first question.... I had very similar thoughts when at bathurst.
Maybe because it was andy lally helped pass it through tech?

My thoughts are often the air at the front of the board is not the main concern. After all you have shoes, and wheels and what not disturbing the flow of the air at the front. The nose cone was low, and combined with the rest of the fairing allowed air to pass around the luge in a very clean manner. The nose cone helped by carving the on coming air and separating it and sending most of the air around the sides of the luge. Due to the nose cone being so close to the ground it also helps stop more air passing under the luge, which when it exits the rear can create more turbulence with the air coming around and over rider. 
Ultimately in a race scenario the more important end is the rear, you want to tidy up the air that is coming off you and the board so that the suction area that is created by the turbulent air is a very small tunnel.

The first diagram on this site may help.

http://www.tonyfoale.com/Articles/Aerodynamics/AERO.htm 

Also another thing to think about when producing the aero is the "golf ball" effect.
A smooth surface means a great level of air resistance where as the pitted surface offers less wind resistance. What actually happens is the air is trapped in the pits and it is this same air that creates a turbulent layer on the ball's surface making the air flow around the ball, and hence reducing resistance. It is the same theory that is used in the new age swim suits. As air is treated in the same way as water.
 

Now stu you know i'm not an engineer and what not, but this is my understanding of aero/fluid dynamics.
I'm not saying i'm right, but hopefully it can start you on the right path. Andy will definately be able to help you, and maybe even talk about the theories used in F1 which i know he was experimenting with.

 

Either way i'm sure it'll look sweet.
When can i ride it? haha
Cheers

G 

Comment by Sakamoto on June 5, 2011 at 23:39

Being honest Stu, I can't really comment on why the nose cone passed Tech at Newtons, a decision made by the organisers, I guess.

 

The "smoothest" airflow design is the "golfball" design, which Grits mentioned, as the air slides upon itself creating minimal turbulant resistance. However, Grits is also right that the greatest area of airflow control, for racing, would be the dirty air coming off the back of the board, close to the ground, due to a rider being able to draft easier in dirty air.

Andy ran his cone out the front of the trucks, which helped control the movement of air under his board, and close to the ground for compression.

The nose cone of Andy's, with a "vortex generator" style rear aero would be interesting...:)

If I can suggest it, cut four inches off the front of the cone, and replace it with suitable impact foam, in the shape of the removed peice. Would definately pass Tech then.

Then go kick butt....lolol.

Add a Comment