![]() |
| 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 |
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
Tina wrote:
Sorry. Rigid bodies do NOT rotate around their cg if an external force is applied whose vector goes thru it. No need to be sorry. I agree with that and not sure what I wrote that would imply otherwise. Drop a yardstick, cg at the 18 inch mark, so that its zero inch edge hits a table. The center of rotation as a reaction to that force is the table edge. You may write an equation that descibes rotation around its cg, and another that describes translation, but a center of rotation, to many who deal with such things, is that point on a rotating body whose translational motion does not include rotation, the body appears to rotate around it. In the case I just described, such a point is at the end of the yardstick. You are obviously defining center of rotation differenrtly than I am, but my American Institute of Physics Handbook on page 2-9 talks about rotation "in which some axis or point remains fixed in space". That is the center of rotation. In the several examples I've given that axis, the center of rotation, is not at the center of gravity. I can't speak for anyone else posting to this thread, but I don't believe I used the term "center of rotation" as such. And I don't disagree with anything you've written above. I am sure the math and classical physics folks use the same definition. It's perfectly fine to talk abou other ways of describing rotation, but engineers who think about it a little, even if they are pilots, would tend, I expect, tend to agree with AIP handbook if they are trying to communicate with other engineers. . As I claimed earlier, if allowed thusters on a rigid body, I can make it rotate around ANY point. The table edge in my example could be replace by such a thruster. Definite agreement. But if you were given only one thruster and it is at the end of your yardstick pointing downwards like so: | =====================V The yardstick would rotate around the CG when the thruster is turned on. Now, if the forces are removed, you will get no argument from me that rotation is about the CG. The forces are not removed in the OP's question. Okay. The original post asked whether pulling back the stick causes the plane to rotate about the CG or some other point. That is a tad more analogous to my yardstick drawing above with only one thruster than the other situations mentioned. Of course there is the complications of the motion through the air and what happens as the angle of attack of the wings is changed as the rotation starts to occur. But that resulting complex motion first begins with the plane starting its rotation about its center of gravity. My BSc in physics may be a bit rusty, and I don't try to presume to speak for engineers, but I'm not sure there is much disagreement left here worth arguing about. And even if there were, I'm not sure it would accomplish anything anyway! :-) |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| a question for the aeronautical engineers among us | Tina | Piloting | 10 | November 4th 07 01:56 PM |
| Are flight engineers qualified to fly? | Mxsmanic | Piloting | 14 | January 23rd 07 08:39 PM |
| Aerodynamic Drag | Kyle Boatright | Home Built | 7 | September 26th 05 04:34 AM |
| Aerodynamic Simulation of Standard Cirrus Glider | Jim Hendrix | Soaring | 13 | November 10th 04 12:38 AM |
| Airfoil aerodynamic simulator... | Thomas J. Paladino Jr. | Piloting | 4 | May 17th 04 03:41 PM |