The Aerodynamics Development of the New Land Rover Discovery

  • Sébastien Chaligné
  • Ross Turner
  • Adrian Gaylard
Conference paper


With ever stricter emissions regulations and the upcoming certification procedure defined in WLTP, the importance of aerodynamics for OEMs is increasing. This paper presents the aerodynamics development of the fifth generation Land Rover Discovery and gives an insight into the recent migration towards the use of new tools and processes to ensure future vehicles’ compliance is achieved.

In the early development stages, numerical methods were exclusively used to optimise the main proportions of the vehicle, as well as to understand sensitivities and draw a road-map to attain the aerodynamics attribute targets. A full-scale test property (“Aerobuck”) was then built and tested in the fixed-ground MIRA Full Scale Wind Tunnel (FSWT) to optimise specific areas in order to reduce the drag coefficient. These tests were done in combination with an extensive use of CFD to enable a better understanding of the flow fields and mechanisms involved. Finally, the development of an aerodynamically optimised wheel enabled the lowest drag coefficient to date for a Land Rover SUV, CD = 0.33.

Although certified in the MIRA FSWT, the validation process has also seen prototypes tested in the moving-ground FKFS Aeroacoustic Wind Tunnel (AAWT) benefiting from 5-belt ground simulation. A direct comparison between experimental and numerical results has also been made; they generally show good agreement between the two tools except for the prediction of so-called “cooling drag”.



The authors would like to acknowledge the support from Aerodynamics Team at Jaguar Land Rover, Gaydon, UK. The authors would also like to thank Jaguar Land Rover for giving their permission to publish this paper.


  1. 1.
    Howell, J., Gaylard, A.: Improving SUV aerodynamics. In: 6th MIRA International Vehicle Aerodynamics Conference, pp. 1–17 (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gaylard, A.P.: The Appropriate Use of CFD in the Automotive Design Process. SAE Technical Paper 2009-01-1162 (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Samples, M., Gaylard, A.P., Windsor, S.: The aerodynamics development of the Range Rover Evoque. In: 8th MIRA International Conference on Vehicle Aerodynamics (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gaylard, A.: The new Jaguar XE: a case study in computational aerodynamics. In: International Forum Advanced Automotive Aerodynamics (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen, H., Chen, S., Matthaeus, W.H.: Recovery of the Navier-Stokes equations using a lattice-gas Boltzmann method. Phys. Rev. A 45(8), R5339–R5342 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen, H., Teixeira, C., Molvig, K.: Digital physics approach to computational fluid dynamics: some basic theoretical features. Int. J. Mod. Phys. C 8(4), 675–684 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen, H., Kandasamy, S., Orszag, S., Shock, R., et al.: Extended Boltzmann kinetic equation for turbulent flows. Science 301(5633), 633–636 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gaylard, A.P.: The aerodynamic development of the new Jaguar XF. In: 7th MIRA International Conference on Vehicle Aerodynamics (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gaylard, A., Pitman, J., Jilesen, J., Gagliardi, A., et al.: Insights into rear surface contamination using simulation of road spray and aerodynamics. SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars Mech. Syst. 7(2), 673–681 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Newnham, P., Passmore, M., Howell, J., Baxendale, A.: On the Optimisation of Road Vehicle Leading Edge Radius in Varying Levels of Freestream Turbulence, SAE Technical Paper 2006-01-1029 (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Carr, G., Stapleford, W.: Blockage Effects in Automotive Wind-Tunnel Testing, SAE Technical Paper 860093 (1986)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Künstner, R., Potthoff, J., Essers, U.: The Aero-Acoustic Wind Tunnel of Stuttgart University, SAE Technical Paper 950625 (1995)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Blumrich, R., Widdecke, N., Wiedemann, J., Michelbach, A., et al.: New FKFS technology at the full-scale aeroacoustic wind tunnel of University of Stuttgart. SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars Mech. Syst. 8(1), 294–305 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gaylard, A.P., Kirwan, K., Lockerby, D.A.: Surface contamination of cars: a review. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part D J. Automobile Eng. 231(9) 1160–1176 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Janson, J., Darrieutort, L., Bannister, M.: New development and working methods used in the aerodynamic development of the new large estate, JSAE paper 20005352 (2000)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Costelli, A.F.: Aerodynamic characteristics of the Fiat UNO car, SAE paper 840297 (1984)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fujimoto, T., Miyake, N., Watanabe, Y.: Suppression of mud adhesion to the rear surface of a van-type truck, SAE paper 920203 (1992)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cogotti, A.: A Strategy for Optimum Surveys of Passenger-Car Flow Fields, SAE Technical Paper 890374 (1989)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wickern, G., Zwicker, K., Pfadenhauer, M.: Rotating Wheels - Their Impact on Wind Tunnel Test Techniques and on Vehicle Drag Results, SAE Technical Paper 970133 (1997)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Landström, C., Josefsson, L., Walker, T., Löfdahl, L.: An experimental investigation of wheel design parameters with respect to aerodynamic drag. In: 8th FKFS Conference (2011)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Modlinger, F., Demuth, R., Adams, N.: New directions in the optimization of the flow around wheels and wheel arches. In: MIRA International Conference on Vehicle Aerodynamics (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vdovin, A., Lofdahl, L., Sebben, S.: Investigation of wheel aerodynamic resistance of passenger cars. SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars Mech. Syst. 7(2), 639–645 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Landström, C., Walker, T., Christoffersen, L., Löfdahl, L.: Influences of Different Front and Rear Wheel Designs on Aerodynamic Drag of a Sedan Type Passenger Car, SAE Technical Paper 2011-01-0165 (2011)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Larson, L., Gin, R., Lietz, R.: Aerodynamic investigation of cooling drag of a production sedan Part 2: CFD results. SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars Mech. Syst. 10(1), 628–637 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pitman, J.: An experimental investigation into the flow mechanism around an SUV in open and closed cooling air conditions. In: FKFS – 11th Aerodynamic Conference (2017)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mercker, E., Cooper, K.: A Two-Measurement Correction for the Effect of a Pressure Gradient on Automotive, Open-Jet, Wind Tunnel Measurements. SAE Paper 2006-01.0568 (2006)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mercker, E.: On buoyancy and wake distortion in test sections of automotive wind tunnels. In: FKFS – 9th Aerodynamic Conference, pp. 205–227 (2013)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wiedemann, J., Potthoff, J.: The New 5-Belt Road Simulation System of the IVK Wind Tunnels - Design and First Results SAE Technical Paper 2003-01-0429 (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sébastien Chaligné
    • 1
  • Ross Turner
    • 1
  • Adrian Gaylard
    • 1
  1. 1.Jaguar Land RoverGaydon, WarwickUK

Personalised recommendations