Aerodynamic Test and Development of the Corvette C5 for Showroom Stock Racing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="htmlview paragraph">This pager documents a one shift (10 hour) wind tunnel test program conducted on a Corvette C5 prepared for Sports Car Club <i>of</i> America (S.C.C.A.) World Challenge racing. The testing was conducted at the Canadian National Research Center in Ottawa, Canada. Specific areas of test included front fascia and under tray, rear air discharge, rear wing configuration and angle, B-pillar configuration, and ride height. Standard wind tunnel test procedures were followed. In total twenty-six separate configurations were evaluated. Data for front and rear lift, total drag, and lift/drag (L/D) ratio are provided for each test configuration. The cumulative effects of the aerodynamic changes evaluated in this program, calculated at 192 KPH (120 MPH), increased front down force by 318 N (72 Lb.), and rear down force by 770 N (173 Lb.). Lift/drag ratio was improved from -<i>0.597</i> to -1.016. These changes increased total drag by 381 N (86 Lb.). Further testing lowering ride height 2.5cm rear and 5.0cm front reduced drag by 326 N (73 tb.) and resulted in a L/D Ratio of -1.247. Although data are specific to the Corvette C5, the general principles studied may be applied to any production-based racecar. These modifications should be validated on the racetrack prior to competing to ensure the handling balance can be optimized for the driver and car combination.</div>
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".