SAE paper help?

[MulsanneMike]

I want to verify some figures out of Katz's book and he uses the two SAE papers as reference. The figures from the papers are the following:

1992 Mazda RX-792P:
Cd: .7, Cl: -3.8
Katz's "Application of Computational Methods to the Aerodynamic Development of a Prototype Race Car" (SAE #942498, 1994)

Generic Porsche 962 C:
Cd: .8, Cl: -4.8
Eckert's "The Porsche Wind Tunnel Floor Boundary Layer Control--A Comparison with Road Data and Results From Moving Belt" (SAE #920346, 1992)


Does anyone here have either paper?? I started a controversy over at Atlas F1's Tech forum inquiring about getting the paper without purchase, but ultimately I only want to inquire about a few things from each of the documents:

I want to know if there are any quantifiers for the data, reference area, etc. The 962 figures are well the hell out of the ballpark and I doubt their validity (numbers provided to me from Joest for the 1992/93 Joest 962 indicate .6259 Cd., -2.655 Cl., L/D: 4.40:1, reference area: 1.806 m^2). With numbers like that for the 962 (.8, -4.8) it would have been truly competitive through 1992 in IMSA and history shows the car ran out of steam by '89 (except at the 24 hour endurance events). Based on that, I want to know if the paper gives any clarifying additional information to the Generic Porsche 962 data. Secondly, since the paper in which the Generic Porsche data comes from is on windtunnel to track correlation, I was interested if there is any mention of a correlation offset showing the data gathered in the tunnel and that gathered from the track and how you can extrapolate your tunnel data to realistic track numbers?

I want to know the same for the Mazda GTP figures, does it state car configuration, reference area, or anything of the sort (twin-tier rear wing)? Many thanks.

[avsfan733]

Not starting a controversy or anything Mike but, they only cost like ten bucks if your a member (not sure if you are) and it would probably be easier just to buy them. I don't care if you can find them here, go for it but because of the specificness of the paper,its kinda a shot in the dark.

If you aren't a member drop me a line and I'll see if I can help you out because I am a student Member

[Rubinho]

I might have access to those papers, I don't know how far back our records go. I'll have a look. Watch this space.

[Rubinho]

Ok, I checked out these papers in our library. Unfortunately they only have SAE pubs before 1996 as microfiche (!!) so I can't give you the papers themselves.

The Porsche paper has squat diddly about any hard and fast parameters. It is mostly about the comparison of a full size and 1/4 size wind tunnel and it just happens to use the Porsche 962 as the test piece. All the quoted data is given in % difference from a set configuration but nowhere does it actually quote real Cd, Cl values etc.

The Mazda paper is similarly short on hard facts also being mostly about the computer model they compared with the actual values. One thing it does give are Cl: -3.95 and Cd: 0.73.

I hope this helps.