The discussion centers around the Bernoulli effect as it relates to aerodynamics, particularly in the context of airplane wings and other applications like blowing over a piece of paper. Participants explore the underlying principles, misconceptions, and implications of the effect in both theoretical and practical scenarios.
Participants express differing views on the interpretation of the Bernoulli effect, with some agreeing on its basic principles while others contest specific aspects, particularly regarding gravitational potential energy and its role in airflow dynamics. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views present.
Participants note that the Bernoulli effect has been removed from some academic syllabi, which may limit understanding for students entering related fields. There is also mention of the complexity of isentropic flow relations and their applicability, indicating that some mathematical concepts may be challenging for participants.
This discussion may be of interest to students and enthusiasts of aerodynamics, fluid dynamics, and physics, particularly those looking to understand the nuances of the Bernoulli effect and its applications.
Originally posted by Chagur
Try a little common sense, Fairfield: A symmetric airfoil's upper and lower surfaces are the same, yet the plane flies ... Ever hear of a little something called 'angle of attack'?
Fairfield did not describe what he saw, so what fuels this testy attitude and irritation? You can read minds?Originally posted by Chagur
Try a little common sense, Fairfield: A symmetric airfoil's upper and lower surfaces are the same, yet the plane flies ... Ever hear of a little something called 'angle of attack'?
I was simply trying to explain how you could attain a value for the r.m.s. speed, since as you said, it is not possible to measure the velocity of each individual particle.Originally posted by zoobyshoe
OK, this part here is confusing to me because I don't see how they can possibly measure the velocity of any individual particle, much less all of them.
Completely ignoring that when flying 'upside down' youThe importance of the "lift" airfoil design is over hyped
because most airplanes can be flown upside down
without losing altitude, it just takes more gas.
That's good, cause neither can anyone else here. Therefore quote the remark you are taking exception to, especially when you are being irritated and testy about it, because otherwise it looks like you are referring to the last thing said.Originally posted by Chagur
No, zoobyshoe, I cannot read minds...
I am not sure why you are directing this explanation at me. I am the one who said earlier that it is possible to design a wing that works exclusively on Newton III.Originally posted by Chagur A simple vector force analysis is all is
all that is required to determine even extremely slow flight
or 'flight' via turbulence creation, the 'flapping of wings',
either by birds or insects.
Given the required control surfaces and sufficient power,
even a kitchen table can be made to 'fly'. An excellent
example would be 'the hopeless diamond' which became
the F-117 in its combat configuration.
Originally posted by zoobyshoe
Thanks for the suggestions, Fairfield. The dashes were not moving, and nothing I did would make them start. WebTv can download nothing. It's just a modem and a keyboard. Not even a mouse - you have to use the arrows. (I can plug a printer in, which I have done, because these just print straight off the web.)
-Zooby