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
|
|||
|
|||
Seems like total crap, put it in english would ya
Wayne It most certainly does! since nR=(P1V1)/T1=(P2V2)/T2 Where P1, V1, T1 can be the exterior conditions, and where P2, V2, T2 are the interior conditions it shows the relationships between the variables changing any one variable, alters the other five It is pretty much crap. The law itself (PV=nRT) is certainly not crap. That's the ideal gas law. P is the pressure, V is the volume, n is the amount of gas (usually in moles), R is the ideal gas constant, and T is the Temperature. So if you change the temperature, pressure, or volume of a fixed amount of gas by a known amount, holding one of those parameters constant you can compute how much the other quantity changes. Works very well at low pressures when the behavior of a gas approximates the ideal gas model. However what is the volume of the gas outside the airplane? (Not to mention that the gas inside the airplane is not the same gas as the stuff outside the airplane). I think you can see that this equation doesn't help here. ~Paul |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Yep, still seems like crap to me, but thanks to you both that answered
anyway. I mean I see that if you open the vents and give the air nowhere to go, the pressure will increase, I can feel that with my ears. I also see that with the vents closed, the shape and there the air escapes could make a vacuum too. For those reasons, I see that the outside of the plane is a much more stable place to get the static reference. But all that fancy eqation is to me is crap. To me you make a system, test it to see if it is close to what is actually going on, and forget about it. The engineers can worry about all the details, not the airplane owners (this is the owners newsgroup I hope). I thought he had a typo and was trying to type pervert ;-) Your original post included the text below. If you meant not to pipe the static outside, then you would have the error introduced by each particular aircraft, that would take calibration to get accuracy and would still change when the cabin pressure changed for many reasons. Is that what you meant? Wayne Without the static ports, we could get rid of all that silly tubing and just leave the static port connection to the instruments open to the air. (Of course there is no getting around needing a tube for the pitot port.) It is pretty much crap. The law itself (PV=nRT) is certainly snip same gas as the stuff outside the airplane). I think you can see that this equation doesn't help here. ~Paul |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
ADF static? question | JFLEISC | Home Built | 3 | December 28th 04 01:28 AM |
Is my static port leaking? | Derrick Early | Instrument Flight Rules | 2 | August 15th 04 01:13 AM |
Is a static port a precision thing? | Larry Smith | Home Built | 8 | August 12th 03 10:26 PM |
Static in KX-165A | Chad Lemmen | Owning | 3 | July 21st 03 09:57 PM |
Canard static port location | Paul Lee | Home Built | 1 | July 12th 03 02:55 AM |