Aero-Dynamic Lubrication?

[akahenaton]

Are there any systems for Aerodynamic Lubrication?:friday: :hihi:

(YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!):) :) :phones: :wave: :hihi: :lol: :shrug: :) :eek2: :eek2: :eek2: :eek2: :eek2: :eek2: :eek2: :eek2: (Think MACH 20!!!)

[arkain101]

LOL, I have heard of things resembling this concept. In underwater for example air bubbles swarming the submersible can reduce drag.

 

I did come up with an invention idea that is related here.

 

I wondered, if a person was do build a design correctly to create a plante that flies itself.

 

Lift is created by gaining speed through the air to create motion etc, and allow the air to pass over the wing structure to create the lifting effect etc...

Now, if one was to build such a plane where the engines were located in such a posistin that they provided substantial thrust of air over the fusilage even while the plane/flying machine was at rest relative to the ground, would it, could it fly, and even maybe hover?

 

For an example. If you take a plane and put it in a wind tunnel. And hold it from blowing backwards it will try to take off. Now, lets attatch a hypothetical engine that blows air through a vent to a high energy lifting wing structure of the fusilage and create some lift, and redirect the remaining air flow downwards to prevent undesired motion and add to the lift.

 

Whats the thoughts on this wild idea lol.

[Buffy]

I'm not sure, but I believe that there are problems with laminar flow systems at high mach and certainly at ultra-sonic (mach 20 was mentioned above), both because of the the effect of heat on the surfaces not being able to maintain the tiny ribs (passive) and holes (active suction) necessary to create the laminar effect and the speed differential between the medium and the inducible vacuum sucking into the laminar holes. There's a ton of interesting research at NASA on this, and you could start here.

 

Whoosh!

Buffy

[GAHD]

arkain, you idea is startelingly similar to the system I've been working on for an RC plane I'm designing.

[Turtle]

I'm not sure, but I believe that there are problems with laminar flow systems at high mach and certainly at ultra-sonic (mach 20 was mentioned above)...

Whoosh!

Buffy

 

I missed the Mach 20 in all the EEEE's, moreover I didn't know about laminar flow breaking down at higher speeds. Fascinating Buffy; you know everything!:rain: Of course if GAHD is staying under the sound barrier with his model, a little micro-grooving might enhance performance.:hyper:

 

The shh is out of wooshh...whoo,

Turetler

[alexander]

GAHD, are going to ionize (if i am not mistaken, that is what russians were working on to reduce drag on their superhigh speed airplanes way back when, in the middle of the cold war) the air particles a few inches before the front of the plane to make the air tension sort of "break" before it actually hits the front surface of the plain?

[CraigD]

Are there any systems for Aerodynamic Lubrication?

I’m uncertain what akahenaton means by “aerodynamic lubrication”, but can guess at a couple of possibilities

• Lubricating fluid. The famous SR-71 used the fuel contained in its single-walled wings to redistribute heat from its hot leading edges to its cooler flat sections, allowing it to radiate frictional heat without melting its titanium leading edges. Due to this construction, the aircraft leaked fuel prior to flight, leading to one “cult myth” that this leakage was designed to persist during flight to produce evaporative cooling, another that it wetted the aircraft’s surfaces to make them “slicker”. Neither claim is true.
  
• Active aerodynamics. Several experimental aircraft have incorporated computer-controlled systems such as small movable panels and, pressure sensors, and air jets, to create a airfoil or other airframe component with less drag than its static shape would produce. It’s a promising technology, somewhat analogous to using mechanical vibration to reduce mechanical drag between surfaces.
  

(Think MACH 20!!!)

Given that unmanned X-43 has reached nearly mach 10 in level flight, MACH 20!!! may not be as incredible a thought as it might seem at first glance. :confused:

[GAHD]

No alex, nothing that far-out. More like redesign the harier. :D The exaust is in the wrong place! :confused:

[alexander]

i dont have any source other then my previous post, cuz this has been pretty secret information, but, it was that russians were developing the rechnology that will ionize the air about 2 meters in front of the plane thus decharging it before it hits the plane surface thus creating less friction and not melting all the special ceramic shielding... I heard that there were reports of Russian jets flying close to a border 16 times the speed of sound, and i beleive it was from some special on the science channel a long time ago...

but perhaps they were missusing information, the only real reference i found was this: http://www.astronautix.com/articles/energia.htm

which claims that 1/8 scale of Buran (russian shuttle that got launched from an airplane) weighing at 1400 kg was making suborbital flights at mach 16, so i first dont claim that russians did not succede in their ionizer development, and the flights were suborbital, so i dont claim mach 16 on an airplane, but i here deem it is probably possible, cuz it worked in suborbit almost 20 years ago...

[GAHD]

You want to see nasty auronautics innovations check-out the Chieneise!

[Pyrotex]

LOL...if one was to build such a plane where the engines were located in such a position that they provided substantial thrust of air over the fusilage even while the plane/flying machine was at rest relative to the ground, would it, could it fly, and even maybe hover?....

The answer is "yes" or "damn near yes".

In the late 70's, Mississippi State University worked with the DOD on a new kind of plane. I cannot remember its name so I couldn't Google for it. I will try to describe it.

 

Ordinary fusilage, ordinary wings sticking straight out (perpendicular) from fusilage. However, about 5 feet out from the fusilage, the wing bends straight down and is shaped like a semi-circle, open side up. At the other end of the semi-circle, the wing continues straight out (horizontal) as if nothing had happened. In the geometric center of the semi-circle, an engine is mounted, with a propeller that just barely fits inside the semi-circular section of wing.

 

A propellor with a circular cage around it is a "vented propellor" and has a high propulsion efficiency. Well, the configuration above would be called a "semi-vented propellor". Plus, the cross-section of the half-cage itself is the cross-section of a wing. Therefore, the propellor pulls a LOT of air over that semi-circular shaped piece of wing and creates a LOT of lift.

 

No, it didn't hover. But it allowed the plane to fly at really, REALLY slow speeds. Looked funny as hell, though. :eek:

[GAHD]

Artificially increasing is indeed a very intersting thing to consider in aeronautics. Traditional prop-planes have increased lift in the areas directly behind their engines because the prop forces more air over and under the wing, increasing the velocities involved and thus incresing the lift generated by that area. Modern jet-aircraft have lost that extra lift thatnks to under-wing or in-fuselage design.

[GAHD]

Just a side-note, the Bernoulli principle is a very important part of flight. Bernoulli's equation is for the more math-oriented.

[arkain101]

The easiest way to see the Bernoulli Principle in action is through a discovery I made.

 

Turn on a water tap to a fast stream flow. Take a Spoon from your kitchen that is a good size. Hold it in hand by finger and thumb, letting it dangle vertical, scoop part at the bottom. While holding the spoon vertical and allowing it to move loosly like a pendulum, place the back side of the scoop towards the stream and Voila, Flight has been discovered.

 

The bend in the spoon makes the stream of water accelerate as it passes over the curve. It creates a low pressure area and the atomosphere wants to get 'in that low pressure area'. So the water then glues itself to the spoon and the mass of it swinging AROUND the curve of the spoon and shooting in the opposite direction the lift on the spoon is being directed causes the bernoulli principle.

Lift is created by the cintrifugal forces of the air that has angular momentum around the wing and is literaly attatched to the wing surface.

 

Just as if you were to swing on a roap that I was holding onto, It would pull me around. This if lift effect.

 

 

My hovering plane design is to create a flexible chassy that is wrapped in a tight smooth flexible fabric. The plane Only needs to push up on the fabric with the internal framings to create a dynamic adjustable ration wing effect. On the sides, top and bottom of the plane design.

Engines that are mounted around the plane (which is invisioned as a saucer like shape). Blow air right at the plane through thin vents that expand widely to sort of wrap half way around the 'edge' of the saucer, the part that cuts the wind. The vent is wide but blows a thin layer of highly accelerated air. Both front and back. The engines would probably need to ahve the ability to reverse air flow direction.

 

The design is just a napkin sketch. The aerodynamics could get quite interesting, if one was to aim the air stream from two engines towards eachother to cause the two interacting high velocity air to generate an efficient lift.

[GAHD]

:pirate: It's scary how similar our basic ideas ar arkain, and my design started as a napkin sketch too. Great minds...or simple ones ;)

 

My design keeps fuselage and wings, but ducts the engines backwards through the wings to create the increased lift. It also incorporates a flexible chassy, I was considering neoprine as the skin but sch a design would preclude the use of a standard jet engine as the exaust would burn away the skin surrounding the exit ports. Perhapse secondary turbine could draw force from a main engine situated in a heat-sheilded area ("fire paste" has intrigued me for use in such an exaust situation before) but that's just more weight and would probably offset the generated lift too much. More likely I'll just use a few ducted electric ans at different angles of attack as the power plat for the 4'-6' test model I want to build.

[arkain101]

Yes, it is lol.

 

In fact I spent a moment last night thinking about it, and realised i could just use a typical wing. On this wing place a few engines located out in front of the wings edge of attack by a bit of distance. The Engine itself would be a vented intake, that can lift up and down to act a bit like a flap. The engines would be encased in a vent like body which takes that efficient setup and blows high pressure air into the main chamber of the duct. The exit ports would be located along the wing edge and blow a fast layer of air over the wing making its own wind. It would of course try to propell itself forward But with a specific bend in the wing and a flap to catch and direct the high speed air from the tail edge of the wing back towards the ground it should lift.

 

I get confused if it would lift or not. I mean can we really defy gravity by hanging onto a vacuum? If I was to hold onto a wing and blow air out of my mouth fast enough could I make myself fly?

I guess according to my mass transfer description of how lift works I suppose it would work. As you are creating upwards directed momentum.

[CraigD]

All of the folk interested in STOL/VTOL might find the history of aircraft designed to exploit the Coandă effect interesting. Thought nowhere as successful as vectored thrust systems such as the Harrier’s, or tilt rotors like the Osprey’s (thought some would argue that “successful” is an exaggeration of the Osprey’s, or even the Harrier’s service records), a number of both weird and unremarkable –looking aircraft fal into this category.

 

Improvements in takeoff performance in prop aircraft due to a combination of tractor (propeller in front) configuration and enlarged trailing edge wing flaps near the propeller are common in STOL aircraft – there are, to my knowledge, no widely used pusher (propeller in back) STOL airplanes, even though this configuration has proven to have improved in-flight efficiency, and is very popular in “exotic” high-performance aircraft like the VariEze and the Beech Starship.

 

I really wish I could find a reference to a very strange looking, 50s-era experimental aircraft that paired a large-diameter prop with incredibly big wing flaps in an attempt at near VTOL performance, - arkain’s description sounds much like it - but I’ve tried and failed to in a reasonable amount of searching. :)