HazelNuts39
Now we're talkin'! So coriolis can be abandoned since it has "minimal effect".
Conditions must be established to allow it to obtain!
Imagine instead of the standard (typical) airfoil section in the bernoulli model, something different.
Rather than fix the wing at 0 degrees, and provide airflow other than from the motion of the airfoil, let us mount the wing on a spar pivot. The wing can now rotate on command, independent of flow; Angle of Incidence can be controlled.
Let us set 90 degrees, 'flat plate'. We now activate the tunnel turbines, to 200 knots. Without delay, we immediately select and acquire 8 degrees of AoI.
Where did 'Kutta' go?
I envision this experiment as analogous to the lack of coriolis effect in Bermoulli's bathtub.
I think my point is to establish that given a set of "prescribed" conditions, just about anything can make sense, or fail explanation.
How obsessively we unpack the theory of lift requires a man made set of conditions?
A famous aviator has demanded that the shape of an airfoil must be a cambered one, to explain lift. He is not WRONG. Not exactly.
The rotation of a vortex aft of the moving wing tips is predictable, due the architecture of the wing, and has immutable direction. This is to do with velocity and viscosity, plus existing flow.
Once established, prior conditions create a rigid and predictable result.
In reality, and in fantasy, both.
To disprove the bathtub problem, actual conditions must be explained, then accounted for. Does this make the standard bernoulli myth accurate?
Isn't "Suction" yet another mistake?
Last edited by Lyman; 19th Nov 2012 at 15:56.