Downloaded from SAE International by University of Liverpool, Sunday, August 12, 2018

SAE TECHNICAL
PAPER SERIES 2007-01-4294

On-Road Evaluation of Devices to Reduce

Heavy Truck Aerodynamic Drag
Ronald E. Schoon
International Truck and Engine Corporation

Commercial Vehicle Engineering

Congress and Exhibition
Rosemont, Illinois
October 30-November 1, 2007

400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A. Tel: (724) 776-4841 Fax: (724) 776-0790 Web: www.sae.org
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Liverpool, Sunday, August 12, 2018

The Engineering Meetings Board has approved this paper for publication. It has successfully completed
SAE's peer review process under the supervision of the session organizer. This process requires a
minimum of three (3) reviews by industry experts.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise,
without the prior written permission of SAE.

For permission and licensing requests contact:

SAE Permissions
400 Commonwealth Drive
Warrendale, PA 15096-0001-USA
Email: permissions@sae.org
Tel: 724-772-4028
Fax: 724-776-3036

For multiple print copies contact:

SAE Customer Service

Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada)
Tel: 724-776-4970 (outside USA)
Fax: 724-776-0790
Email: CustomerService@sae.org

ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright © 2007 SAE International
Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE.
The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper. A process is available by which discussions
will be printed with the paper if it is published in SAE Transactions.

Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation or publication by SAE should send the
manuscript or a 300 word abstract to Secretary, Engineering Meetings Board, SAE.

Printed in USA
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Liverpool, Sunday, August 12, 2018

2007-01-4294

On-Road Evaluation of Devices to Reduce

Heavy Truck Aerodynamic Drag
Ronald E. Schoon
International Truck and Engine Corporation

Copyright © 2007 SAE International

ABSTRACT The areas of focus in this study represent some of the

greatest opportunities for drag reduction in a typical
Several practical devices to reduce aerodynamic drag tractor-trailer system. A full-scale prototype was
on a typical class 8 line-haul tractor-trailer application developed for at least one concept from each of the
were evaluated last year by this author and Fongloon three areas of focus: tractor-trailer gap, trailer side and
(Peter) Pan in SAE 2007-01-1781 [Reference 1]. Those trailer aft body. The prototype development process
evaluations were conducted via reduced scale wind yielded essentially a “proof-of-concept” hardware set for
tunnel testing and focused on three areas within the each device that could be evaluated on the road for its
tractor-trailer system: tractor-trailer gap, trailer sides and impact on fuel economy.
trailer aft body.
Down-selection of concepts from Phase I to Phase II
This paper builds on our previous work, and presents was based not only on performance, but on the
the results of full scale, on-road fuel economy tests of a additional goal of this program to provide “practical”
select sub-set of those devices. The on-road fuel devices.
economy testing was accomplished in accordance with
SAE Type II (J1321) test procedure [Reference 2]. The author engaged Great Dane Trailers as a partner in
the prototype development process, specifically with
An 11.5% improvement in highway fuel economy was regard to devices that are installed on the trailer. Their
demonstrated for a select combination of devices. knowledge, expertise and resources were invaluable in
developing devices that were not only practical, but
INTRODUCTION innovative.

Aerodynamic drag is a significant parasitic loss in a Wal-Mart was also engaged in this project. As a motor
typical class 8 line-haul tractor-trailer system operating carrier customer and end user of this technology, their
at highway speeds. Practical devices to reduce voice played a significant role in selecting the geometry
aerodynamic drag offer a cost-effective opportunity to for the experimental aerodynamic trailer tested in this
improve fuel economy in this application. project.

The evaluations reported in this paper were conducted

as part of a tractor OEM industry consortium to develop TEST METHODOLOGY AND FACILITIES
practical devices to reduce aerodynamic drag. The
consortium work was managed by the Truck The evaluations reported in this paper were conducted
Manufacturers Association (TMA) and was partially via full scale on-road testing. Testing was conducted on
funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). a closed track at a fixed speed of 65mph. This
eliminated a number of variables present in on-highway
The TMA-managed project had two distinct phases. The testing, including driver response to varying terrain and
initial development of these practical devices was accommodations for merging and overtaking traffic.
conducted in Phase I. Multiple devices were developed
and evaluated for each area of focus. The results of
Phase I development are the subject of the Reference 1 SAE J1321 TYPE II FUEL ECONOMY TESTS
paper.
The on-road fuel economy tests conducted in this project
The refinement and on-road evaluations of devices were followed the procedures outlined in SAE J1321 for Type
conducted in Phase II. Those results are reported in this II fuel economy tests [Reference 2]. This method
paper. requires simultaneous running of a control tractor-trailer
and the test tractor-trailer. The control tractor-trailer is
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Liverpool, Sunday, August 12, 2018

unchanged in configuration throughout the test. The TRACTOR-TRAILER GAP

method also requires multiple runs of each test
configuration. To have a valid test, each run must have Of the five tractor-trailer gap related concepts evaluated
a very consistent ratio of fuel used between the test in Phase I of this program, two were selected to proceed
vehicle and the control vehicle (t/c ratio). Vehicles must to Phase II -- the variable geometry side extenders and
also undergo rigorous inspections, break-in and warm- the trailer forebody shape.
up procedures. All these procedures are focused at
eliminating common sources of variation in on-road Reference 1 reported that the variable geometry side
testing. extenders and the trailer forebody shape had the best
performance in terms of aerodynamic drag reduction.
The on-road fuel economy testing was conducted at the Each delivered aerodynamic drag reduction of 3-5%
Transportation Research Center (TRC) in East Liberty, when tested alone or in combination of other devices.
Ohio or at the Bosch Automotive Proving Grounds in That suggests those devices might obtain a 1-3% fuel
South Bend, Indiana. The identical tractor was not used economy improvement at highway speed when if one
in every test event. However, every test did use a applies a 2:1 trade between fuel economy. That trade is
current production International 9000i series tractor, commonly accepted for level ground travel at 65mph
similar in design to the model used in Phase I wind and is frequently cited in the Reference 3 fuel economy
tunnel testing [Reference 1]. In addition, every test white paper published by Cummins.
event included a baseline run to calculate the difference
in fuel economy attributable to the device(s) tested in By contrast, merely changing the side extender shape,
that event. or adding vertical plates to the tractor, trailer or both
showed improvement of 1% or less in aerodynamic
Based on Phase I [Reference 1] results, it was clear that drag. Those devices were not carried forward to Phase
significant drag reduction opportunities existed in all II because they did not deliver enough performance
three areas being investigated in this study. In addition, improvement to merit further consideration at this time.
it was apparent that using combinations of devices
frequently produced results that were greater than the Finally, the air fairing extension would most likely need
effect of a device individually. to be executed in combination with variable geometry
side extenders. It delivered an appreciable performance
High cubic volume dry-van trailers were used during improvement of 2% aerodynamic drag reduction, but it
these tests. The baseline trailers were 8.5’ wide x 13.5’ was deemed significantly more difficult to execute than
tall x 53’ long. just varying the side extender length alone.

CUSTOMER CONSIDERATIONS TRAILER SIDE

The performance of the devices in Phase I was a very The primary focus of trailer side device investigation was
important selection criterion for consideration in Phase into looking at various options for trailer skirting. Skirt
II. The customer is going to consider how quickly their size and shape were investigated. In addition, a “belly
investment in a device is returned. It is the performance box” or enclosed lower section of the trailer was
of the device that will deliver the savings and shorten the examined.
return on investment (ROI), making the purchase of the
device more attractive to the customer. The Reference 1 paper showed that straight side skirts
provided the greatest performance improvement as
However, the customer also considers the likely compared to v-shaped or u-shaped skirts, and that the
frequency of repair or replacement for a given device. benefit increased linearly as the skirt height to ground
This judgment varies by customer and is weighted by decreased. Alternatively, a belly box also showed
their experience and factors specific to their operation. If equivalent performance improvement as a straight side
a customer anticipates the money saved in fuel will be skirt with the same ground clearance. However, adding
offset by frequent device repair or replacement, they will a belly box and a lower skirt section together gave better
be less likely to purchase that device. Hence, device performance than a skirt alone for the same height to
durability and reliability is very important. ground. Therefore, both straight side skirts and belly
boxes were considered in Phase II.
Finally, many customers will be reluctant to add devices
that will increase driver workload or add complications to
workers at loading docks. These are just some of the TRAILER AFT BODY
factors to be considered in developing a practical device
that customers will accept. The focus of trailer aft body device work was on adding
taper to the aft end of the trailer to change the size and
shape of the wake downstream of the trailer. The
Reference 1 paper demonstrated significant opportunity
to reduce drag exists with different taper lengths and
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Liverpool, Sunday, August 12, 2018

angles. The amount of drag reduction demonstrated, Phase I. Hence, the dropped frame was expected to
combined with the flexibility in choosing taper length and provide an aerodynamic benefit.
angle, made trailer aft body taper an item to be
considered in Phase II. However, the dropped load floor does require a special
variable height suspension to raise the load floor to
match standard dock height for loading and unloading
PHASE II PROTOTYPE DEVELOPMENT cargo. The dropped load floor does help compensate
for interior volume lost due to the overall height
EXPERIMENTAL AERODYNAMIC TRAILER decrease and the cargo carrying length which was
shortened two feet to accommodate the tapered aft
International Truck and Great Dane Trailers have a section. The interior volume is about 5% less than a
common customer, Wal-Mart, who is very focused on baseline 53 foot long trailer.
fuel economy improvement. That focused customer was
the catalyst in the relationship that led to the Trailer Side Skirting
construction of the experimental aerodynamic trailer.
The trailer side skirting was designed to achieve the
Intellectual property generated during Phase I and same height to ground as the smallest h/d (height to
reported in Reference 1 was shared with Great Dane. ground divided by equivalent diameter) evaluated in the
That data facilitated the generation of several Reference 1 paper. The h/d ratio is defined in that
experimental trailer concepts with various combinations report as well.
of aerodynamic drag reduction devices. Wal-Mart opted
for the trailer configuration that had the greatest potential The skirts for the experimental aero trailer were
for aerodynamic drag reduction and hence fuel economy designed to automatically stow at speeds below 35 mph
improvement. The Wal-Mart experimental aerodynamic and deploy at speeds greater than 35 mph to reduce the
trailer is shown in Figure 1. chance the skirts would be damaged by incidental
contact with the ground or other obstacles (e.g. snow
bank) during low speed maneuvering. The skirts are
powered by compressed air already provided to the
trailer, and are controlled by vehicle speed sensing
which is also already available. No driver interaction is
required to deploy and stow the skirts in operation. The
skirt movement also provides an opportunity to shed any
snow and ice that has accreted on the skirts. There are
trailer side skirt designs on the market today for trailers,
but they are fixed designs.

Figure 2 shows the skirts in the stowed position and

Figure 3 shows the skirts in the deployed position. The
skirts stow by folding inboard and up to increase ground
clearance.

Figure 1: Wal-Mart Experimental Aerodynamic Trailer

The primary aerodynamic features of the experimental

trailer are a tapered aft section, dropped frame and
straight side skirts, and an overall height reduction.
International Truck constructed a reduced height air
fairing and side extenders to match the lower trailer
height.

Overall Height Reduction and Drop Frame

The overall height reduction of one foot results in an 8%

reduction in frontal area. As installed on the tractor, the
trailer overall height is 12 feet 6 inches. The trailer Figure 2: Trailer Skirts Stowed on Wal-Mart
overall dimensions are 8.5’ wide x 12.5’ tall x 53’ long. Experimental Aerodynamic Trailer
The load floor of the trailer was dropped 16” as
compared to the baseline trailer. This dropped frame
created a similar aerodynamic configuration, although
different depth, as compared to the belly box tested in
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Liverpool, Sunday, August 12, 2018

Figure 3: Trailer Skirts Deployed on Wal-Mart Figure 4: Tapered Aft Section of Wal-Mart
Experimental Aerodynamic Trailer Experimental Aerodynamic Trailer

Because of its moving parts and automated operation,

the prototype trailer side skirt design is more complex TRACTOR-TRAILER GAP
than fixed skirt designs already on the market. The
prototype design would need to undergo significant Trailer Forebody Shape
durability testing and likely require design refinements
before it could be released for production. However, the Reducing tractor trailer gap nearly always improves
skirt design does offer a compelling solution to common aerodynamic performance. However, a minimum
objections of damage due to curb or ground impact, and tractor-trailer is required for low speed maneuvering.
the skirt motion gives opportunity to shed snow and ice. The trailer forebody shapes developed in Phase I
And driver workload is not increased since the skirt [Reference 1] were designed to stay within the tractor
deploys and stows automatically. Ultimately, the trailer swing envelope, even when the tractor is at a
customer will need to judge whether it is a better value close gap for good fuel economy.
than fixed skirt systems already available today.
The Phase I [Reference 1] test results did show some
Trailer Tapered Aft Section sensitivity to the inclination angle of the top of the device
as compared to the horizontal top of the trailer. Of the
The tapered aft end of the experimental aero trailer is parts tested the 15 degree inclination angle part
structural. That helps minimize the opportunity for performed the best, and that was the angle selected for
damage when contacting a loading dock or backing in at the prototype parts. The “flat” 15 degree prototype part
a truck stop or other confined parking area. was fabricated for Phase II testing.

Also, the tapered section geometry is fixed, which An attractive feature of this design option is that it does
eliminates the additional effort that would be required by not have any moving parts. Since it is a partial gap
a driver or dock worker to stow and deploy parts. The closure device, it will provide access to the back of cab.
challenge is to design the taper in a matter that does not The prototype design did consider access panels for
adversely impact the ability to load and unload cargo. installation, maintenance, and it was designed to be
lifted into position by overhead crane or forklift.
Wal-Mart incorporates a roll-up door at the aft end of
their trailers. Great Dane identified that it would be Figures 5 and 6 are images of the part based on CAD
possible to add a two foot long section that would not data, and Figures 7 and 8 are photos of the prototype
adversely impact the roll-up door open area, if the taper part installed on a baseline trailer.
angle was 15 degrees. From the data in Reference 1, it
is anticipated that this taper length and angle would yield
an 8-9% aerodynamic drag reduction. The tapered aft
section of the trailer is shown in Figure 4.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Liverpool, Sunday, August 12, 2018

Figure 5: 15 degree, Flat Design -- Isometric View

Trailer Forebody Device, CAD Image Figure 8: 15 degree, Flat Design -- Installed on Trailer
Trailer Forebody Device, Prototype Part
Note: Access panel removed in photo

Tractor Side Extenders -- Variable Length

During Phase I development [Reference 1], lengthening

the cab-mounted side extenders decreased drag. The
more the extenders could be lengthened, the greater the
reduction. The maximum reduction occurred when the
extenders contacted the front of the trailer.

However, the prototype parts were intentionally

designed not to contact the trailer in the deployed
position to eliminate additional loading on side extender
Figure 6: 15 degree, Flat Design – Front View parts. Investigation during full scale part design
Trailer Forebody Device, CAD Image determined that 4 to 6 inches of clearance was needed
to avoid contact during high speed maneuvers when
extenders were deployed.

The variable length extenders are envisioned to

automatically stow and deploy with tractor speed, but the
actuation system was not constructed due to resource
constraints. As a result, the prototype required manual
operation. The extenders were designed in two
sections: a fixed section that mounted to the tractor and
a movable section that nests inboard of the fixed
section. When stowed, about six inches of the
moveable inboard panel extends aft of the fixed
outboard panel. The parts were designed to travel
approximately 14 inches from fully stowed to fully
deployed position.

Figure 9 shows the variable length side extenders

Figure 7: 15 degree, Flat Design -- Installed on Trailer installed on a production International 9400i tractor. In
Trailer Forebody Device, Prototype Part that image the extenders are fully deployed. Figure 10
shows the baseline tractor configuration for the tractor
trailer gap device tests.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Liverpool, Sunday, August 12, 2018

economy improvement might be achievable with this

trailer.

There were some unique construction details in the build

of this trailer, which could have an adverse impact on its
fuel economy. International recommended some
“tuning” tests be conducted on the aero trailer to
determine if greater drag reduction and fuel economy
improvement could be obtained from that design.

International conducted the tuning tests in two phases.

First, yarn tufts were placed on the areas of concern at
the aft end of the trailer and visual observations were
made about flow quality at the aft end of the trailer.
Then smooth panels were fabricated and installed over
Figure 9: Variable Length Side Extenders -- Deployed the channels and seams and the visual observations
were repeated. Figure 11 shows yarn tufts on a smooth
panel installed on the trailer roof.

Figure 11: Yarn tufts on smooth panels covering

tapered roof section of trailer
Figure 10: Baseline tractor (S945) and trailer for gap
device tests
Once satisfactory flow patterns were obtained, rigorous
fuel economy tests were conducted. The trailer was
tested in the as received and “tuned” configurations.
PHASE II TEST RESULTS The trailer side skirts were also removed as an
incremental run during testing.
EXPERIMENTAL AERODYNAMIC TRAILER
These tests were conducted at the Bosch Proving
The experimental aerodynamic trailer was Grounds in South Bend, Indiana. The tests were
commissioned by Wal-Mart, and Wal-Mart conducted conducted at a steady state speed of 65mph on a three
the initial fuel economy tests on the trailer. Wal-Mart’s mile oval track.
testing was not funded by this program, and Wal-Mart
only shared high level test results with International, Figures 12 and 13 show the tractor and baseline trailer
although International was allowed to observe a portion for tuning tests. Figure 14 shows the control vehicle
of the testing. which was used for these tests.
Wal-Mart conducted their fuel economy tests at the
Goodyear Proving Grounds in San Angelo, Texas. Wal-
Mart demonstrated a 6.7% fuel economy improvement
for the experimental aerodynamic trailer as compared to
a baseline 53 foot long trailer similar to those in their
fleet today.

International did not conduct a wind tunnel test on the

exact configuration chosen for the experimental aero
trailer, but the Phase I [Reference 1] wind tunnel test
results suggest the trailer could achieve a drag reduction
of 22-23%. This estimate suggests an 11-12% fuel
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Liverpool, Sunday, August 12, 2018

the test ID 3 improvement from test ID 2 improvement.

This increment implies only a 4% aerodynamic
improvement for the skirts, much less than the 8% to
11% anticipated from the Phase I test results reported in
Reference 1. The difference is most likely due to the
fact that the experimental trailer had a drop frame and
that resulted in a 16” shorter skirt face height than in the
Reference 1 testing.

Finally, smoothing out the gutters and ridges in tapered

section of the trailer did not yield a significant
improvement as seen by comparing test ID 4 to test ID
2.

Table 1: Fuel Economy Test Results for Experimental

Figure 12: Test Vehicle (P421) with Baseline Trailer Aerodynamic Trailer
Long Haul -- 65mph
% Fuel
Economy
Test T/C
Test Vehicle Improvement
ID Ratio
versus
Baseline*
1 P421 Baseline 1.12 0
P421 Wal-Mart,
2 0.99 +11.5
As-Is
P421 Wal-Mart,
3 1.01 +9.6
No Skirts
P421 Wal-Mart,
4 Smooth Gutters 0.99 +12.0
and Ridges
* Accuracy: within +/- 1.0%
Figure 13: Test Vehicle (P421) with Baseline Trailer

International was very rigorous in conducting this test,

and the results were repeatable as noted from run to run
on the track and in the t/c ratios in Table 1 which are all
well within 2%.

TRACTOR TRAILER GAP

The trailer forebody shape and the variable length side

extenders were tested individually. Those results are
shown in Table 2. The trailer forebody device
demonstrated a fuel economy improvement of 2%, and
the variable length side extenders demonstrated a fuel
economy improvement of 1%.
Figure 14: Control Vehicle (E463) with Trailer
These tests were conducted at the Transportation
Research Center in East Liberty, Ohio. The tests were
Table 1 shows the results of International’s fuel conducted at a steady state speed of 65mph on a seven
economy tests with the Wal-Mart experimental and a half mile oval track. Figure 10 shows the tractor
aerodynamic trailer. The “as received” trailer and trailer used for these tests. Figure 14 shows the
demonstrated an 11.5% fuel economy improvement over control vehicle which was used for these tests.
the baseline trailer. A fleet with 6,000 tractors could
save 12.4 million gallons of fuel a year. Phase I testing [Reference 1] suggests even better
results may be possible if parts were tested in
Also, from Table 1 it can be seen that installing the combination with trailer side skirts and trailer aft body
trailer side skirts provided an increase in fuel economy taper. It was planned to run the devices in
of +1.9 % (better). That value is obtained by subtracting
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Liverpool, Sunday, August 12, 2018

combinations, but it did not happen due to resource could translate into an annual savings of 12.4 million
constraints. gallons and $32.2 million dollars for fleet with 6,000
tractors.
International felt the trailer forebody device developed in
this program has some unique and non-obvious A 2% highway fuel economy improvement was
advantages over trailer “nosecone” type devices on the demonstrated for a prototype trailer forebody shape that
market today. For example, the wind tunnel data from International is patenting. And a 1% highway fuel
Phase I [Reference 1] showed sensitivity to the economy improvement was demonstrated for prototype
inclination angle of the top of the device to the top of the side extenders of variable length.
trailer. The 15 degree angle was determined to provide
the best performance. International has submitted a The Phase II on road fuel economy test results agreed
patent application for that device. well with the Phase I reduced scale wind tunnel test
results when a 2:1 ratio is applied to translate
It should be noted that the trailer forebody device aerodynamic drag improvements into highway fuel
delivered the 2% fuel economy improvement while economy improvements. For example, wind averaged
paired with a 9400 tractor with a full aero package (see drag coefficient improvements of 22 to 23% were
Figure 7). The device may deliver substantially more predicted for the Wal-Mart aerodynamic trailer, and the
performance if it were paired with a less aerodynamic measured fuel economy improvement was 11.5%.
trailer.

Table 2: Fuel Economy Test Results for Tractor Trailer ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Gap Devices
Long Haul -- 65mph The author wants to thank International Truck and
% Fuel Engine Corporation for the permission to publish this
Economy paper.
Test T/C
Test Vehicle Improvement
ID Ratio
versus The author would also like to thank both the U.S.
Baseline* Department of Energy and International Truck and
1 S945 Baseline 1.10 0 Engine Corporation for financial support that made this
study possible, and the Truck Manufacturer’s
S945 and Association for management oversight of this project.
2 Trailer Forebody 1.06 +2
Device The author also appreciates Great Dane Trailers and
S945 and Wal-Mart allowing International Truck to participate in
3 Variable Length 1.08 +1 the design and testing of the experimental aerodynamic
Side Extenders trailer used in this study.
* Accuracy: within +/- 1.0%
REFERENCES

1. Schoon, R. and Pan, F. P. “Practical Devices for

CONCLUSIONS
Heavy Truck Aerodynamic Drag Reduction,” SAE
paper No. 2007-01-1781, 2007. (Originally published
Significant fuel economy improvements were
demonstrated in this program for the devices developed as SAE 2006-01-3531 in 2006).
for the tractor trailer gap, trailer side and trailer aft body. 2. SAE J1321, “Joint TMC/SAE Fuel Consumption Test
Procedure”, Reaffirmed October 1986.
An 11.5% highway fuel economy improvement was 3. Cummins MPG Guide, “Secrets of Better Fuel
demonstrated with an experimental aerodynamic trailer Economy – The Physics of MPG”, December 2003.
commissioned by Wal-Mart. That fuel economy savings