 |
 |
Bernoulli
Name: N/A
Status: N/A
Age: N/A
Location: N/A
Country: N/A
Date: N/A
Question:
I reviewed the q&a about the bernoulli principle and I am not
satisfied. first, why must the air get less dense if it has to travel a greater
distance? Why could not the portion of the air that goes over the airplane wing
simple
simply "get behind" the portion of air that goes under the wing? second, ass
using that the density above the wing is less than the density below the win
g, can one explain the lower pressure by saying that fewer molecules strike
wing from the top than from the bottom?
Replies:
The answer to the second question is "Yes". The first will
require some more thought... Hmmm. It appears the real reason the air is
denser (or at least an understandable version of a reason) below the wing
is the way the wing is tilted - the wing basically just compresses
that air beneath it. The question of why the air that goes
over the wing goes faster rather than getting left behind is (I think)
actually quite complicated - you can imagine that if the wing had
some kind of barrier sticking up in the middle, the air would get
stuck behind that. The result of that is turbulence, and airplane
wings are deliberately designed to avoid that kind of thing. In other words,
the answer really depends on the detailed shape of the wing, which
is deliberately designed to do the right thing (ie. make the air
go faster smoothly, rather than falling behind and causing turbulence).
Arthur Smith
As stated in the previous response, wings are designed for LAMINAR
flow, not TURBULENT flow. The lift of a wing occurs as long as the flow is
both laminar and the path over the top is longer than the path under
the bottom. What happens if the air over the top "gets behind" the air flowing
under the wing?? Well, at the trailing edge of the wing you have a low
density on top and the "correct d" density on the bottom. The net result
is a pressure difference, resulting in flow from underneath the wing
up over the top (from the backBACK side) -- i.e., turbulence!, rather than
laminar flow.
gregory r bradburn
Click here to return to the Physics Archives
| |
Update: June 2012
|
|