Influence of Different Road Vehicle Positioning on The Aerodynamic and Aeroacoustics Characteristics Using CFD Analysis

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.53799/sxy06285

Keywords:

computational fluid dynamics, vehicle positioning, lateral offset, wake interference, aerodynamics drag

Abstract

The rise in private vehicle ownership has led to more vehicles on the road, particularly during peak hours in highways and densely populated areas such as metropolitan and industrial regions. This situation results in increasing fuel consumption and environmental pollution. This study examines the influence of vehicle positioning and longitudinal spacings on aerodynamic and aeroacoustic characteristics using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis. The research evaluates aerodynamic loads, flow patterns, pressure distribution, vortex generation, and surface acoustic power levels for cars and double-decker buses. A grid independence test ensures the accuracy of the simulations. Six configurations with longitudinal spacings of 4 and 8 meters are analyzed, focusing on the interaction of vehicles in different positions. The results show that the Bus-Car-Car configuration (Case E) with a 4-meter longitudinal space is the most effective way to minimize aerodynamic drag and enhance energy efficiency. In this configuration, the drag coefficient (Cd) for the bus is lowered to 0.671, while the trailing cars see significant reductions in their drag coefficients, reaching 0.148 and 0.246, respectively. Compared to other configurations, Case E achieves up to a 37% reduction in drag for the bus and a 50–60% reduction for the trailing vehicles. This setup facilitates improved flow recovery and reduced turbulence, leading to greater stability and lower acoustic power levels. The study underscores the importance of determining optimal vehicle positioning and longitudinal spacings to achieve aerodynamic and acoustic efficiency, establishing a foundation for sustainable transportation solutions.

References

[1] S. Hassan, H. A. Amlan, N. E. Alias, M. A. A. Kadir, N. Mashros, and N. S. A. Sukor, “Vulnerability of Road Transportation Networks: A Bibliometric Analysis,” SSRN Electron. J., 2022, doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4002940.

[2] W. J. Lee, S. Il Kwag, and Y. D. Ko, “The optimal eco-friendly platoon formation strategy for a heterogeneous fleet of vehicles,” Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ., vol. 90, p. 102664, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2020.102664.

[3] M. Siemon and D. S. Nichols, “CFD analysis of heterogeneous and homogeneous multi-truck platoon aerodynamic drag reduction,” 2018 Fluid Dyn. Conf., 2018, doi: 10.2514/6.2018-3862.

[4] S. T. Kaluva, A. Pathak, and A. Ongel, “Aerodynamic Drag Analysis of Autonomous Electric Vehicle Platoons,” Energies, vol. 13, no. 15, p. 4028, Aug. 2020, doi: 10.3390/en13154028.

[5] V. Vohra, M. Wahba, G. Akarslan, R. Ni, and S. Brennan, “An Examination of Vehicle Spacing to Reduce Aerodynamic Drag in Truck Platoons,” in 2018 IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference (VPPC), IEEE, Aug. 2018, pp. 1–6. doi: 10.1109/VPPC.2018.8604977.

[6] F. H. Robertson et al., “An experimental investigation of the aerodynamic flows created by lorries travelling in a long platoon,” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn., vol. 193, p. 103966, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.jweia.2019.103966.

[7] M. He et al., “Detached eddy simulation of a closely running lorry platoon,” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn., vol. 193, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.jweia.2019.103956.

[8] W. M. Hamiga and W. B. Ciesielka, “Numerical Analysis of Aeroacoustic Phenomena Generated by Heterogeneous Column of Vehicles,” Energies, vol. 15, no. 13, p. 4669, Jun. 2022, doi: 10.3390/en15134669.

[9] P. Qin, A. Ricci, and B. Blocken, “CFD simulation of aerodynamic forces on the DrivAer car model: Impact of computational parameters,” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn., vol. 248, p. 105711, May 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.jweia.2024.105711.

[10] S. Wang, T. Avadiar, M. C. Thompson, and D. Burton, “Effect of moving ground on the aerodynamics of a generic automotive model: The DrivAer-Estate,” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn., vol. 195, p. 104000, Dec. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.jweia.2019.104000.

[11] M. Arafat et al., “A Hybrid RANS/LES Model for Predicting the Aerodynamics of Small City Vehicles,” J. Adv. Res. Exp. Fluid Mech. Heat Transf., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 1–13, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.37934/arefmht.17.1.113.

[12] J. Tu, G. H. Yeoh, C. Liu, and Y. Tao, “Practical Guidelines for CFD Simulation and Analysis,” in Computational Fluid Dynamics, Elsevier, 2024, pp. 251–285. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-323-93938-6.00011-7.

[13] F. MENTER, “Performance of popular turbulence models for attached and separated adverse pressure gradient flows,” in 22nd Fluid Dynamics, Plasma Dynamics and Lasers Conference, Reston, Virigina: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Jun. 1991. doi: 10.2514/6.1991-1784.

[14] L. Wang et al., “Analysis of the Influence of Different Turbulence Models on the Prediction of Vehicle Aerodynamic Performance,” Energies, vol. 18, no. 11, p. 2803, May 2025, doi: 10.3390/en18112803.

[15] M. Syafiq et al., “Computational Fluid Dynamics Analysis of Aerodynamic Characteristics on Overtaking Vehicles in Crosswind Conditions,” Int. J. Automot. Mech. Eng., vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 12373–12387, Jun. 2025, doi: 10.15282/ijame.22.2.2025.10.0947.

[16] R. F. Soares, K. P. Garry, and J. Holt, “Comparison of the Far-Field Aerodynamic Wake Development for Three DrivAer Model Configurations using a Cost-Effective RANS Simulation,” in SAE Technical Papers, Mar. 2017. doi: 10.4271/2017-01-1514.

[17] F. Delassaux, V. Herbert, I. Mortazavi, and C. Ribes, “Numerical Investigation of the Flow Around a Simplified Ground Vehicles Using Hybrid RANS/LES Method,” in Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics and Multidisciplinary Design, vol. 143, 2020, pp. 357–365. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-27607-2_29.

Downloads

Published

31-08-2026

How to Cite

[1]
“Influence of Different Road Vehicle Positioning on The Aerodynamic and Aeroacoustics Characteristics Using CFD Analysis”, AJSE, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 9–18, Aug. 2026, doi: 10.53799/sxy06285.