Can a Funnel Improve Airflow in a Greenhouse Inflator Using PVC and a Vane?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RandallPink
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dynamics
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on creating an inflator for a greenhouse's double roof using 4" PVC and a vane to direct airflow. There is debate over whether adding a funnel to the intake will enhance performance compared to using just the PVC pipe. Theoretical arguments suggest that a funnel won't improve pressure, as it cannot multiply airflow. However, practical considerations indicate that maintaining airflow is crucial for keeping the greenhouse inflated. Ultimately, there is skepticism about the effectiveness of this approach.
RandallPink
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
We are trying to make an inflator for the double roof on a greenhouse using 4" pvc and a vane on the back to keep it pointed into the wind. There is a lot of disagreement on whether a funnel on the intake end will make it work any better than just the 4" pipe facing into the wind.
 

Attachments

  • Amish inflator.jpg
    Amish inflator.jpg
    26 KB · Views: 476
Physics news on Phys.org
Theoretically, a funnel shouldn't help because pressure is pressure and you can't multiply it, but in reality the system isn't closed and you'll need airflow through it to keep the greenhouse inflated. I think it may be a losing battle, though.
 

Thread 'Is calling fictitious forces "not real" just about terminology?'

Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
View full post »

Thread 'Derivation of Hamilton's Principle: Questions'

I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
View full post »

Similar threads

Help Me Design a Motorcycle Airbox for Charity Racing Series
Replies
3
Views
2K
Measuring the Speed of Sound in Water, Using Faraday's Law
Replies
14
Views
3K
A few questions about airflow and filters...
Replies
5
Views
2K
Underground pump vault airflow considerations
Replies
15
Views
3K
I Some questions about Cosmic Inflation
Replies
4
Views
4K
How does a Western free reed work? (musical instruments)
Replies
12
Views
4K
B Why doesn't cosmic inflation violate conservation of energy?
Replies
3
Views
3K
A Few questions about how a refrigerator works
Replies
13
Views
4K
Energy positive, "all inclusive" engineering concept
Replies
3
Views
4K
How come a liquids dynamic viscosity is not indicative of flowrate?
Replies
8
Views
6K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top