View Single Post
Old 01-08-2008, 07:42 AM
  #34  
rickair7777
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,409
Default

Originally Posted by Cubdriver View Post
Rick, the problem with your calculation is that it does not measure suction as an abstraction from anything else. Bernoulli's equation is a type of energy conservation equation applied only to incompressible (such as slow) and adiabatic (without heat added) flows. It utilizes the laws of principles of conservation of mass and conservation momentum. The latter is a consequence of the well known law, F=ma. Relating the Bernoulli equation to lift is a very tricky problem, but it was solved in about 1905 by the use of vortices as models to develop estimations for circulation around an airfoil. From that we get lift via the Kutta Jakowski theorem (lift= density x freestream velocity x circulation). You may know about JavaFoil to calculate pressure distributions on low-speed airfoils, which uses vortex math and geometry to find the velocities and pressures. Vortex models can be extended to the third dimension to analyze wings. CFD is used when a more accurate estimation of lift is required, and it uses truncated Navier Stokes equations to accounts for things like gravity, body forces, compressibility, boundary layers and viscosity.

I am not trying to show how many books I own just that it is silly to claim lift is due to X% Newton and X% Bernoulli. I admit I fall into the same trap because it is tempting to oversimplify to reduce the brain cells involved to gain a true understanding. Most of what we read is so oversimplified as to be comical.

I have read up on most of that, and I know the entire Bernoullui equation. You are correct that Bernoulli vs. Newton is a simplification. For purposes of this discussion, I think everyone was trying to contrast the differences between what happens on top of the wing vs. below the wing.

Same fluid flow, different geometry. I also agree that the flow adjacent to the boundry layer on the bottom could very well produce a negative (below ambient) pressure at that point...the previous discussion used the term differential pressure when discussing the "suction" on top.

The "newton" effect on the bottom may well occur some distance below the wing in the airmass...ie air "bouncing" off the air flow closer to the boundry layer.

I think we are arguing over macro characterization of micro events, but I'm sure we agree on the nature of the micro events.
rickair7777 is offline