![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Le Chaud Lapin wrote:
Most importantly, I also notice that there was a ***HUGE*** amount of hand-waving going on, far more than one would expect in a field that has been researched for over a century. I still need to find a book that I can trust. How much math are you willing to deal with? If you can handle some calculus, then probably the least expensive book I know of that may fit the bill is: "Theoretical Aerodynamics" by L. M. Milne-Thomson. Paperback edition is available from Dover Press. I went to the WWW and started reading more aero-astro excerpts, and concluded that not only is theory still in flux, the experts do not even agree on the basics. The very basics. Huge amounts of money had been spent on wind-tunnels. But after all that, I could not get two experts to agree on the basics. And this was a not simply a matter of different styles, using integral instead of differential form of equations, for example, or, deciding where to put a constant, as we electrical engineers do in our expressions of the Fourier integrals...there was *fundamental* disgreement about what causes lift on an airplane. I have no idea what web sites you have visited - all I can say is that there is _no_ dispute among experts on the very basics. Aerodynamic models are now run routinely on computers - the field is known as Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) - which would hardly be possible if the very basics were still in dispute! I asked one of the pilot's again..."How sure are you that the aviation world understands the basics?" He said he was very sure. He started rattling off things about NASA. NASA is an excellent and authoritative source and you'll be very pleased to discover they have web pages that address the VERY SAME COMPLAINTS you have about many of the bogus explanations of lift that are floating around. Here are two of the most relevant pages you should read: http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/bernnew.html Excerpt from the above: "Arguments arise because people mis-apply Bernoulli and Newton's equations and because they over-simplify the description of the problem of aerodynamic lift. The most popular incorrect theory of lift arises from a mis-application of Bernoulli's equation." http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/wrong1.html Excerpt from the above: "There are many theories of how lift is generated. Unfortunately, many of the theories found in encyclopedias, on web sites, and even in some textbooks are incorrect, causing unnecessary confusion for students. The theory described on this slide is one of the most widely circulated, incorrect explanations. The theory can be labeled the "Longer Path" theory, or the "Equal Transit Time" theory." So I started imagining, with no mathematics, what goes on with fluids around surfaces, which lead me to these various experiments. It is a great idea to experiment - even with things others already understand. I do it too. If you are interested in some books on the subject I'd be happy to make some suggestions. Sure. In addition to the above, there are a couple of other (expensive, alas) books I would suggest: "Introduction to Flight" by John D. Anderson, Jr. Contains a history of the science of flight and also goes into details on some of the more common mistakes people make in explanations of lift. I do not own this book, but others also give it great reviews. "Fundamentals of Aerodynamics" by John D. Anderson, Jr. A well regarded, though mathematical, text on the subject. I do not own this book either, but I expect it is good, based on my knowledge of the next book I mention: "Computational Fluid Dynamics" By John D. Anderson. I bought and read through this book a couple years ago and it does a great job of introducing CFD. I mention it here only because it is how I know the style and quality of Anderson's writing to confidently recommend two of his other books (above) that I have not read! He carefully disects and explains each of the differential equations of the various types used for computational modeling, among the many things covered. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FAA advisory voids IFR certification for GPS's!!! | Prime | Owning | 12 | May 29th 07 01:43 AM |
Brass or copper sheet? | Scott | Home Built | 11 | October 15th 06 02:20 AM |
4130 sheet | log | Home Built | 4 | September 1st 04 01:42 AM |
Day 2 New Castle Score Sheet | Guy Byars | Soaring | 3 | September 25th 03 02:39 AM |
S-H Spars: Anyone check for voids laterally? | Mark Grubb | Soaring | 1 | September 20th 03 04:27 AM |