Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > Aerodynamics
Reload this Page >

Bernoulli vs Newton

Notices
Aerodynamics Discuss the physics of flight revolving around the aerodynamics and design of aircraft.

Bernoulli vs Newton

Old 07-20-2008, 10:26 AM
  #126  
victorzamora
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 1,731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton

Paper Cub, I know that, I'm saying that at with a plane at 40,000ft AGL, there's NO way of telling that it deflects air downwards regardless of how precise your equipment is. I meant relative to the 40,000 feet difference he was talking about.

I think ground effect is one wingspan of the plane.....and beyond that the air deflected downwards does NOT hit the ground. In helis it does seem like it's 5-6 rotor-lengths up, but still...not 40,000ft!
Old 07-20-2008, 08:10 PM
  #127  
BMatthews
 
BMatthews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chilliwack, BC, CANADA
Posts: 12,422
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes on 19 Posts
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton

Sorry victor but at one wingspan or a thousand a wing (or rotor which is just a rotating wing) will still deflect the air downwars just as Paper Cub says. We don't need any instruments to know that. It happens.
Old 07-20-2008, 10:49 PM
  #128  
victorzamora
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 1,731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton

I know it deflects....it's just NOT going to be noticeable on the ground no matter how sensitive your equipment is, even if you're doing a thought experiment where ANY effect is noticed.
Old 07-21-2008, 11:45 AM
  #129  
Tall Paul
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Palmdale, CA
Posts: 5,211
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton

If it's still possible to stand on the extended centerline of a runway that handles large jets... a mile or so back from the threshold on the approach end..
If the plane passing over is say a 747 at 250 feet.. when it is touching down, the wake vortex it created will be touching the ground about where you are standing.
You'll hear it coming, feel it, and see the disturbance on the ground as it passes.
The plane moves a LOT of air in flight.
Old 07-21-2008, 12:50 PM
  #130  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton

I know it deflects....it's just NOT going to be noticeable on the ground no matter how sensitive your equipment is, even if you're doing a thought experiment where ANY effect is noticed.
Why does this matter? If a tree falls in the woods and nobody hears it, is there sound? I don't get this?

OH wait, this is like the fly in the cockpit or the birds in a truck myth? That is if a plane is flying in the air and a fly is flying in the plane, then the fly does not add any weight while its flying. Or if a truck is full of birds and they are flying you cannot weigh the birds. I think Mythbusters busted this one a while back. If not, I appologize, I am not trying to be smart.
Old 07-21-2008, 02:35 PM
  #131  
CrateCruncher
My Feedback: (1)
 
CrateCruncher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 949
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton

Judging from the popularity of this great thread I would figure there is a keen interest in the subject. Being the oldest and best understood of the branches of physics, classical mechanics is the way the world around us works. I searched the internet looking for a non-math tutorial on the subject and didn't find anything. There are 100's of books on the subject but all expect at least some understanding of calculus from page 1. (I guess this is understandable being that Mr. Newton invented calculus in order to prove his kinetic theories to the nay-sayers.)

If you do want to delve further, I highly recommend Engineering Mechanics Vol. 1&2, by J.L. Meriam. Another common textbook is Engineering Mechanics by R.C. Hibbeler. There are at least 5 editions of either book now and obsolete editions can be had at any used book store near an engineering college for about $5-10.

If your calculus is rusty like mine or you want an intro to the basics I can strongly recommend "Calculus Made Easy" by Silvanus Thompson. It was first published in 1910 and today is more popular than ever. It's a $4 paperback.

If you aren't blessed with a cheapskate bookstore in the neighborhood theres always Amazon or Abebooks on the internet.
Old 07-21-2008, 04:47 PM
  #132  
Tim Green
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Ashtabula, OH
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton

I think the great thing about this experiment, is that it allows us to draw conclusions, without calculus. Thus logic is sufficient in this case, to prove that it's the air's momentum that provides the lift.
Old 07-21-2008, 04:49 PM
  #133  
Tim Green
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Ashtabula, OH
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton

And one of the good books on the subject is "Understanding Flight" by David F. Anderson and Scott Eberhardt (McGraw Hill publishers).
Old 07-21-2008, 10:48 PM
  #134  
BMatthews
 
BMatthews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chilliwack, BC, CANADA
Posts: 12,422
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes on 19 Posts
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton

ORIGINAL: victorzamora

I know it deflects....it's just NOT going to be noticeable on the ground no matter how sensitive your equipment is, even if you're doing a thought experiment where ANY effect is noticed.
Ah... SORRY! I was thinking that you were going the OTHER way with your previous post. You're totally right of course. The deflection motion will be totally absorbed before it can be felt even a fraction of the way to the ground.


An interesting point. At our local airport there's a spot out by the fence where you can stand in the open and look directly overhead at the huge airliners on their glide paths. I've had 747's fly over me about 2 to 3 wingspans high and didn't feel a thing. Yet it was close enough to easily see all the hydrualic lines and other details in the landing gear wells. Pretty amazing when you think about it. The ONLY sign of their passing overhead was a fluffy swishing sound that I assume was their wing tip vortices ripping by overhead and colliding with each other. And I couldn't feel those either. Just heard them.
Old 07-22-2008, 01:05 AM
  #135  
victorzamora
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 1,731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton

ORIGINAL: Tim Green

I think the great thing about this experiment, is that it allows us to draw conclusions, without calculus. Thus logic is sufficient in this case, to prove that it's the air's momentum that provides the lift.
HOW?? The chopper is trying to lift itself PLUS a plate that weighs as much as the total energy of the air it's deflecting! I'm using "weight" not as in Kg, but as in Newtons....the way "weight" really is, not mass.


BMatthews: It's all good, I'm just glad I was able to FINALLY express that point well.
Tall Paul: a 747's wingspan is ~225ft....so at about 250ft AGL, the plane is essentially one wingspan above the ground. I'm NOT saying that it stops at 1 wingspan, I'm just saying at around one wingspan. As BMatthews said, at 2 or 3 you cease to feel the wind. I know from personal experience.
Old 07-22-2008, 05:26 AM
  #136  
Tim Green
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Ashtabula, OH
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton

ORIGINAL: victorzamora

ORIGINAL: Tim Green

I think the great thing about this experiment, is that it allows us to draw conclusions, without calculus. Thus logic is sufficient in this case, to prove that it's the air's momentum that provides the lift.
HOW?? The chopper is trying to lift itself PLUS a plate that weighs as much as the total energy of the air it's deflecting!
??? The weight of the plate is negligible, since the chopper lifted the folded plate, but not the unfolded plate. Therefore, the plate deflected the air when it's unfolded, but not when it's folded. Therefore, it's the air causing the lift, since if it's deflected, the chopper won't rise. And if it's not deflected, and allowed to continue it's downward motion, the chopper lifts.

Old 07-22-2008, 11:04 AM
  #137  
victorzamora
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 1,731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton

You didn't read what I said. Its weight is essentially only the amount of air it deflects. Put a plate NOT attached to the chopper 1" under the rotor blades! That'll deflect the air. It'll also allow the heli to lift.
Old 07-22-2008, 12:14 PM
  #138  
Sport_Pilot
 
Sport_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 16,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton

Put a plate NOT attached to the chopper 1" under the rotor blades! That'll deflect the air. It'll also allow the heli to lift.
Which allows the mass to trasfer from the chopper to the enviornment. If the plate was attached then the reaction of air on the plate cancels the reaction of the air leaving the blades, just as an astronaut in space throwing a rock at his feet, if he hits his foot he doesn't move, if he misses then he will move the opposite direcetion as the rock. Your example only proves this point.

BTW the air pressure above the blades will be lower than the air under it, so both work, they just use differant ways to come up with the same answer.
Old 07-29-2008, 06:16 PM
  #139  
Tall Paul
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Palmdale, CA
Posts: 5,211
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton

More grist for the over-analytical...
Can a fan blowing into a sail move a sailboat?
It works in the cartoons...
http://rcuvideos.com/item/WD64D0YB9Z95CSWT
Old 07-29-2008, 09:49 PM
  #140  
CrateCruncher
My Feedback: (1)
 
CrateCruncher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 949
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton

Its a lot like the Heli but I see one major difference. The air can't be deflected into the ground so I would think the normal force increases (car pushes on the earth more) when the prop runs-up. It could be verified by placing the car on a bathroom scale. I would also think the reason the car creeps forward a bit is because the deflector bent under the force of the prop blast lending a very slight horizontal component to the deflected thrust (sorta F cos89.5). If that joint is stiffened up the car shouldn't want to creep anymore. Neat vid!
Old 07-29-2008, 09:54 PM
  #141  
victorzamora
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 1,731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton

The reason the car moved the first time is because the plate ISN'T 100% EFFICIENT!
Old 07-30-2008, 06:27 AM
  #142  
Tim Green
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Ashtabula, OH
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton


ORIGINAL: Tall Paul

More grist for the over-analytical...
Can a fan blowing into a sail move a sailboat?
http://rcuvideos.com/item/WD64D0YB9Z95CSWT
Neat [sm=thumbup.gif] experiment - similar to your original experiment that started this thread. And demonstrating clearly that lift occurs due to the thrust provided by the momentum of the air.

If the air's blocked or deflected in all directions - no thrust, resulting in no motion (no lift).

If the air's deflected in one direction or not blocked at all, thrust occurs, resulting in motion (or lift).
Old 07-30-2008, 11:02 AM
  #143  
Tall Paul
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Palmdale, CA
Posts: 5,211
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton

As with the helicopter on the scale, there was just enough residual thrust in the first condition to allow the vehicle to creep forward.
The amount of power required for the vehicle to move when the motor was reversed was much less than the full power needed for the first condition, which in essence resembles that of a turbo-jet using reversed thrust to stop.
But as a propulsive scheme, as way too many people wish to use for pushing a sailboat, it's as impractical as anything could be.
Old 08-11-2008, 09:39 PM
  #144  
captinjohn
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Hesperia Michigan, MI
Posts: 12,957
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton

HA! Boy if B_ _ L - S_ _ T was music...you guys would have a BRASS BAND!!!! no I did not say that!
Old 08-19-2008, 08:16 PM
  #145  
Tim Green
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Ashtabula, OH
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton


ORIGINAL: captinjohn

HA! Boy if B_ _ L - S_ _ T was music...you guys would have a BRASS BAND!!!! no I did not say that!
Yes - you're absolutely right - Newton, not Bernoulli.
Old 08-19-2008, 09:09 PM
  #146  
B.L.E.
Senior Member
 
B.L.E.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Bernoulli vs Newton




I would say Bernoulli on the left would most likely kick Newton's butt on the right. Bernoulli looks like he has at least 80 pounds on Newton, who, quite frankly looks thin and sickly, almost anorexic. Maybe it's all the court partying or his lifelong feud with that other charlatan who claimed to have invented calculus first, Gottfried Leibniz.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2022 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.