digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

Biologically-inspired teardrop electric car design

autobloggreen.com — So, is this the most aerodynamic car you've seen all day? For one student, Elle Kalm, it's the cleanest air-slicing vehicle that's feasibly possible, at least according to Kalm's recently-published paper. The paper, which was published in August, is a Master's thesis on the design of an aerodynamic green car.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • kgrandia, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Hmm, story won't load. Did you crash their server??
  • SebastianBlanco, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1it's working again
  • FreakyD, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7That should stack up well in an accident.
    • 0o0Moylan0o0, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1That looks absolutely freakin ridiculous
      • nihao, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Who cares? It doesn't matter as long as the shape is effective and efficient. (Think about a knife. What matters is how well it cuts, not how pretty it is.)
    • CrumpetUp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2depends on what its made of... the aptera is made of a composite which would hold up pretty well in an accident (like formula 1)
    • nihao, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0As CrumpetUp said, it could, if it was made of the right materials.
  • Error601, on 10/27/2007, -0/+16Football shapes are well known for their optimal sub-sonic aerodynamic properties, but they're not particularly efficient as a car because of the lack of payload space. Vehicles have to not only move themselves but stuff inside them too. No idea what "biologically-inspired" means except marketing gibberish.
    • jhshukla, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2unicellular organisms? cell shape resembling a teardrop.
    • nihao, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"biologically inspired" means that it uses principles of biomimickry--taking designs from nature, since forms tend to have already been perfected by nature.

      I would assume this would be a commuter car--suitable for one or two people. You could easily make a larger one to stuff space inside, if you wanted.
  • dudad, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3So using cameras wastes less energy than mirrors?
    • ijustam, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Exterior mirrors cause obscene amounts of drag.
      • ChromaVita, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3And those two big wheels in the front don't?
        • Glenchuck, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Unfortunately, land vehicles mostly need wheels.
          • eatspie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1But can't they design the car with smaller wheels? or with the wheels a little bit inside the body of the car, so that the drag is reduced?
    • nihao, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Basically.
  • sparkysko, on 10/27/2007, -0/+6^-- Agree. This type of vehicle has already been done for the solar car races. Not practical. The lack of space sucks, and the logistics of building the car frame in that shape would suck.
    • nihao, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"This type of vehicle has already been done for the solar car races. Not practical."

      This shape is similar to the Aptera's and other highly aerodynamic cars--how's that not practical?
  • lynx77, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3This is the car we were supposed to be driving in the year 2000 as predicted back in 1971.

    Not exactly anything new, burried as lame.
    • Swarms, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1And it was supposed to fly.
    • Osiriscky3, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1And it's horribly ugly.
    • nihao, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Uh, yeah. Is it any surprise that something designed today, in a society where technology is rapidly progressing, that it looks futuristic? Plus, that's the point of many sci-fi works--to give you a glimpse of what's to come.

      Eventually you have to take a step back and say "hey, we're in the future."
  • danconia, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Hmmm last time I checked teardrops don't fall very fast...
  • Mu99ins, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Positively dymaxion.

    http://www.washedashore.com/projects/dymax/index.h ...
  • statiktv, on 10/27/2007, -0/+2buried swiftly for super lame design. like something out of back to the future 2. gasp! no mirrors! breakthrough i tell you!
  • meachen, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2buriied.....for looking like Mr. Bean's car from the future
    • nihao, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0So let me get this straight: technology, as rapidly advancing as it is, shouldn't look futuristic? Where do you come up with this infallible logic?
  • theholyraptor, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2the cad renderings look like something I would have done in 4th grade playing with the copy of TrueSpace I got on 14 floppy disks on my pentium 2 computer. A crayon drawing would look as professional. I haven't read the actual paper, but if the image is anywhere close to the real thing, the paper was kind of pointless considering they seemed to factor in everything possible aerodynamically, but then not factor a single thing in from the real world such as design constraints and safety.
    • nihao, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"the cad renderings look like something I would have done in 4th grade playing with the copy of TrueSpace I got on 14 floppy disks on my pentium 2 computer. A crayon drawing would look as professional."
      No, it wouldn't have. You sound like you're trying to be Simon Cowell.

      "I haven't read the actual paper"
      Obviously.

      "if the image is anywhere close to the real thing, the paper was kind of pointless considering they seemed to factor in everything possible aerodynamically, but then not factor a single thing in from the real world such as design constraints and safety."

      "Design constraints" is vague, and they did factor in safety. Presumably, to you, "safety" = "Hummer H2".
  • Glenchuck, on 10/27/2007, -0/+2I was most bothered by the lack of fenders on the front wheels. The thing will be covered in mud every time it is driven.
    • defectiv, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Not to mention that open wheels create a lot of drag, not something you want in an aerodymamicly 'perfect' design...
  • databoy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0All I can say is: if that is the standard coming out of universities the planet is doomed. A design concept for a master's degree. The guy needs castration so he will not breed any offspring.
    I could design a better vehicle and I left school when I was 15.
    • nihao, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"All I can say is: if that is the standard coming out of universities the planet is doomed. A design concept for a master's degree."
      Presumably you're saying this because it's quite different from what you're used to. Have you ever been to college? It's not uncommon for academia to produce something at odds with public imagination.

      "The guy needs castration so he will not breed any offspring."
      Awesome, you support eugenics. Go to www.iqtest.dk and tell me what your IQ is! (hint: your logic would probably involve you, inevitably, castrating yourself.)

      "I could design a better vehicle and I left school when I was 15."

      I doubt it, and this isn't surprising.
  • QuillShack, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The car overall stability is good..designed creatively..awesome!
  • xtraspecialj, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Why does Aerodynamic and Green car = ugly as hell ???
    • nihao, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Because you're conditioned to like bulky, inefficient cars. Look up "conditioning", and I don't mean what you do to your hair. It's why people in different cultures can have radically different tastes.
  • robphillips, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It looks like a 6 year old learning 3dsMAX created that model..
    • nihao, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Who cares? The model is designed to present the idea, not show off an NVidia Quadro FX 5600.
  • neo926, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0That doesn't look like any teardrop that I've ever seen.
  • conrail, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Pointless. Another retarded design that does little more than to reinforce the notion that the electric car is some kind of joke. Might as well have been designed by Exxon (and probably was).
    • nihao, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Another retarded design that does little more than to reinforce the notion that the electric car is some kind of joke."

      Sure, if you live in an overwhelmingly republican/conservative state, in which case little more than an electric Ford F150 will help quell that notion.
  • lilbitmoreslyk, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1You know this car will never catch on. For starters it looks really bad. No matter how great the underlying tech is or how "Green" it is, the problem is the ridiculous look. It's so different from modern designs that the masses will not flock to it. The only way i can see people buying it is if they have a nice price point. But seeing as how its using the most green and efficient technology the price will as ugly as the car.
    • nihao, on 10/15/2007, -1/+0hint: don't say "for starters" when that's the entirety of your post.

      "the problem is the ridiculous look. It's so different from modern designs that the masses will not flock to it. The only way i can see people buying it is if they have a nice price point. But seeing as how its using the most green and efficient technology the price will as ugly as the car."

      Your focus on aesthetics show that your psychological conditioning to accept a certain aesthetic over others is quite strong. It's just a matter of removing that conditioning, which is quite easy with media exposure. It's the public's fault for not accepting a certain aesthetic, especially if that aesthetic is objectively better than another. (for example, if the public favored an ineffective 'pretty' knife over an effective 'ugly' one, it would be the public's fault for not learning to like the ugly one.)
      • lilbitmoreslyk, on 10/15/2007, -0/+1Don't act like you ignore the physical appeal of cars or any other objects. And especially with a new model you WANT to have physical appeal and besides the only reaosn i mentioned that is because the model is so RADICALLY different from modern day vehicles.
  • davidlow, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"Feasibly possible" is a repetitive redundancy.
  • CrumpetUp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2um... nobody's mentioned the aptera yet? or is that comment buried somewhere.
    • nihao, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It's similar to the Aptera, yes. If there's one good aerodynamic shape that works, then presumably many cars would implement that shape.
    • EdgeOfEpsilon, on 01/01/2008, -0/+1He mentioned the Aptera:

      "The smooth shape of the car body makes it cut the wind and almost no turbulence, therefore low costs on producing and driving it. Even though I hade no time to prove the theory, during my time in California, a new car was released just after I decided for the final concept and it looks like like my concept for more information of that car look the second concept car reference."

      Second concept car ref? Aptera.
  • escapist13, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Honda already has one but there's a reason it won't be in your garage any time soon.

    http://www.udel.edu/igert/pvcdrom/MANUFACT/SOLARCA ...
  • thatbuncha, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1this car is not the most aerodynamic it can be. the tires are sticking way out and would create drag. if it was a sound design, those would be incorporated into the car and not just stuck on at the end like a mr. potato head car. boo this *****.
  • whizkid, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Here's what gets me:

    FTA: "While the thesis is not nearly as detailed as one might like in describing how decisions were made"

    Yet it also says it's 120 pages. How do you have 120 pages and not explain the thought chain for most of the major decisions? That would be the interesting part. I'd consider reading it if it explained how the conclusions were drawn.
    • nihao, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It didn't say that it didn't explain it, just that it wasn't highly detailed.
  • justahuman, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1looks like a solar powered car
  • dstory, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Reminds me of the old Pulse vehicles from the 80's - 90's

    http://www.autocycles.org/index.html
  • nihao, on 10/18/2007, -2/+0To everyone saying it's ugly: Seriously, get over it.
    You don't complain about a knife being ugly, so why would it matter when a car is? You've likely been conditioned from a young age to be used to boxy, bulky and inefficient cars, so it's no surprise that you consider something out of your personal box of aesthetics to be displeasing. If the car's design is better, then it's better--period, and it's a matter of your getting used to the design.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.