本研究著重於探討FFD（Free-Form Deformation）與RBF（Radial Basis Function）參數化，並使用於慕尼黑工業大學和克蘭菲爾德大學研究團隊所提供之一般車型Fastback Drivaer model和高性能車型High-performance Drivaer model作為研究對象。於Ansys Fluent進行數值模擬分析，並將模擬結果與實驗數據進行交叉比對，驗證數值模型之準確性。
研究中，以一般車型車尾部分為主要優化，高性能車型則以車尾翼部分，並針對阻力與升力重點進行多目標優化，分別以FFD和RBF進行車體外型變形優化流程，並比較兩種方法之不同幾何變形能力、氣動性能所改善之效率表現差異。本研究中以阻力係數C_D與下壓力C_L、空氣動力效率AE為主要指標方向，並探討最佳化車體表面壓力係數、流場結構之特徵變化性。研究顯示，FFD與RBF應用於車體外型優化之幾何變形控制、網格變形平滑性、性能改善上存在差異，其中取最佳氣動力性能表現為優化最終指標。

His study investigates the application of Free-Form Deformation (FFD) and Radial Basis Function (RBF) parameterization methods to aerodynamic shape optimization of general and high-performance vehicle models. The Fastback Drivaer model and the High performance Drivaer model were selected as the research objects. Numerical simulations were conducted using Ansys Fluent, and the results were compared with experimental data to verify the accuracy of the numerical model.
For the general vehicle model, the rear body was selected as the main optimization region, while the rear wing was selected for the high-performance vehicle model. Both FFD and RBF were applied to perform geometric deformation and aerodynamic optimization. The aerodynamic performance was evaluated using drag coefficient C_D, lift coefficient C_L, aerodynamic efficiency 𝐴𝐸, surface pressure coefficient, and flow-field structure.
The results show that both FFD and RBF can effectively modify vehicle geometry and influence aerodynamic performance. FFD provides smoother and more continuous deformation, while RBF offers greater flexibility for local shape modification. Overall, this study provides a reference for vehicle aerodynamic shape optimization and parameterization method selection.

1. S. R. Ahmed, G. Ramm and G. Faltin, Some Salient Features of the Time-Averaged Ground Vehicle Wake, SAE Transactions, Vol. 93, Section 2, pp. 473-503, 1984.
2. A. I. Heft, T. Indinger and N. A. Adams, Experimental and Numerical Investigation of the DrivAer Model, Proceedings of the ASME 2012 Fluids Engineering Summer Meeting, FEDSM2012, Rio Grande, Puerto Rico, July 8-12, 2012.
3. L. Miao, S. Mack and T. Indinger, Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Automotive Aerodynamics Using DrivAer Model, Proceedings of the ASME 2015 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, IDETC/CIE 2015, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, August 2-5, 2015.
4. R. F. Soares, S. M. Goñalons Olives, A. P. Knowles, K. P. Garry and J. C. Holt, On the Aerodynamics of an Enclosed-Wheel Racing Car: An Assessment and Proposal of Add-On Devices for a Fourth, High-Performance Configuration of the DrivAer Model, SAE Technical Paper 2018-01-0725, 2018.
5. D. Takács and A. Zelei, Performance Optimization of a Formula Student Racing Car Using IPG CarMaker—Part 2: Aiding Aerodynamics and Drag Reduction System Package Design, Eng. Proc., Vol. 79, p. 77, 2024.
6. A. Lundberg, P. Hamlin, D. Shankar, A. Broniewicz, T. Walker and C. Landström, Automated Aerodynamic Vehicle Shape Optimization Using Neural Networks and Evolutionary Optimization, SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars - Mech. Syst., Vol. 8, Issue 1, pp. 242-251, 2015.
7. E. M. Papoutsis-Kiachagias, V. G. Asouti, K. C. Giannakoglou, K. Gkagkas, S. Shimokawa and E. Itakura, Multi-point Aerodynamic Shape Optimization of Cars Based on Continuous Adjoint, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2018.
8. P. He, C. A. Mader, J. R. R. A. Martins and K. J. Maki, An Aerodynamic Design Optimization Framework Using a Discrete Adjoint Approach with OpenFOAM, Computers & Fluids, Vol. 168, pp. 285-303, 2018.
9. F. Salmoiraghi, A. Scardigli, H. Telib and G. Rozza, Free Form Deformation, Mesh Morphing and Reduced Order Methods: Enablers for Efficient Aerodynamic Shape Optimization, International Journal of Computational Fluid Dynamics, March 2018.
10. X. Hu, B. Yang, Y. Lei, J. Wang, X. Li, L. Liao and T. Xu, Automotive Shape Optimization Using the Radial Basis Function Model Based on a Parametric Surface Grid, Proc IMechE Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering, 2016.
11. M. Varney, M. Passmore, F. Wittmeier and T. Kuthada, Experimental Data for the Validation of Numerical Methods: DrivAer Model, Fluids, 5(4):236, 2020.
12. M. Urquhart, E. Ljungskog and S. Sebben, Surrogate-based Optimisation Using Adaptively Scaled Radial Basis Functions, Applied Soft Computing, 88, 106050, 2020.
13. D. P. Xuan, V. N. Duy, V. M. Dien and P. H. Binh, Aerodynamics Simulation of Prototype Car Based on CFD Technology, International Journal of Heat and Technology, Vol. 43, No. 2, pp. 521-528, 2025.
14. S. Acharya, B. R. Baliga, K. Karki, J. Y. Murthy, C. Prakash and S. P. Vanka, Pressure-Based Finite-Volume Methods in Computational Fluid Dynamics, Journal of Heat Transfer, Vol. 129, No. 4, pp. 407-424, 2007.
15. F. Flandoli and D. Luo, On the Boussinesq Hypothesis for a Stochastic Proudman–Taylor Model, SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis, Vol. 56, No. 3, pp. 3886-3923, 2024.
16. A. Yildizeli and S. Cadirci, Calibration of the k-ω Shear Stress Transport Turbulence Model for Transitional Boundary Layer Flows over Flat Plate and Turbulent Backward Facing Step Flows, Physics of Fluids, Vol. 37, No. 1, 015120, 2025.
17. Qin, Ricci, Blocken (2024), CFD simulation of aerodynamic forces on the DrivAer car model: Impact of computational parameters, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics.
18. L. Ben Moussa, J. Meng and S. Olabi, Front Bumper Inclination on Vehicle Aerodynamic Efficiency: A Novel Numerical Framework Applied to Electric Cars, Designs, Vol. 7, No. 4, 130, 2025.