Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Wingnuts and FlyboysFollow

#1 Oct 29 2008 at 4:50 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Kao, you're into aerospace engineering...is there any way to make an aircraft power itself by its own airspeed? My thoughts were that a fuselage-based wind turbine could be used to power dual props. A system like this would be perfect for small, lightweight craft like reconnaissance and spy UAVs. This is probably infeasible due to power limitations but it has been intriguing me for some time, and wondered if anyone might have heard anything like that.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#2 Oct 29 2008 at 4:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Debalic wrote:
is there any way to make an aircraft power itself by its own airspeed?
[Homer Simpson]Young lady, in this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics![/HS]
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#3 Oct 29 2008 at 4:54 PM Rating: Decent
****
8,619 posts
No the energy transfer loss would mean you wouldn't have enough power to sustain flight.

I know nothing about engineering and just made that up.
#4 Oct 29 2008 at 4:57 PM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
It's called a ramjet.

Note: Ramjets today do use a fuel sources, but this is an issue more with current limitations on chemistry rather than design.

Edited, Oct 29th 2008 8:04pm by Allegory
#5 Oct 29 2008 at 4:58 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Debalic wrote:
is there any way to make an aircraft power itself by its own airspeed?
[Homer Simpson]Young lady, in this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics![/HS]

What, you don't believe in perpetual motion machines??
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#6 Oct 29 2008 at 5:01 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Allegory wrote:
It's called a ramjet.

Yeah, I was thinking along those lines, but as a wind turbine instead of a combustion engine.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#7 Oct 29 2008 at 5:07 PM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
The problem with ramjets isn't their basic design, but our current knowledge of chemistry and technological constraints. We are not able to convert the air into a direct fuel source yet. There is no way for an aircraft to power itself by its own velocity through purely mechanical means.

Edited, Oct 29th 2008 8:09pm by Allegory
#8 Oct 29 2008 at 5:15 PM Rating: Decent
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Wouldn't the system used to collect any air for the turbine just increase the drag (reduce the aerodynamic-ness?), reducing the effectiveness of what power you would gain from the turbine with the addition energy source.

The idea seems similar to the idea of adding electrolysis to a car engine to try and create hydrogen to burn with the gas as some sort of energy boost.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#9 Oct 29 2008 at 5:22 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
You could power a turbine if the aircraft was already at altitude by letting gravity do the work, but you would never reclaim the amount of energy you put into the aircraft to get it to that altitude. Plus you have to then carry the mass of the generator you are using. Even if you had an airplane at speed in level flight, the drag coefficient on the wind turbine would decrease the amount of force you could apply on your propulsion system. Plus the propulsion system turning through the air would also experiance drag. Even if your conversion mechanisms were 100% efficient you still would experiance a net loss because you wouldn't be imparting additional energy intot he system

Think of it this way. if you start a non powered airplane off at 10,000 feet, put it into a perfect parabolic dive, the airplane will only be able to climb to 9,000 or so feet because of drag on the wing and fusalage. (ignoring thermals and sailplanes for the moment)

There are several proposals out there for an electric or electric hybrid passenger aircraft. Composite fusalage, electric propellers, solar cells over the entire fusalage and wing area. It wouldn't be as fast as a jet, but it theoretically would be much cheaper. They already have some long duration UAV prototypes in the works along those lines, but the main limitation at this point is our reliivly inefficient solar cells. Give things another 5 years, and if solar cell efficiency goes up significantly (which it is looking like it might, with things like the recently discovered black silicon, etc) then I would expect to see design work start on a hybrid solar aircraft. Probably somethign in the short haul class to start.


I personally would like to see a return of the semi rigid airships such as those that the new zepplin company is making, only larger, for domestic cargo delivery. You could coat the top of one of them with solar cell cloth, and if you didn't mind a slower transit you wouldn't have any fuel costs. since a large blimp would have more than enough surface area to power engines.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#10 Oct 29 2008 at 5:30 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Pumpkin Lörd Kaolian wrote:
lots of technical crap

Neat. This is the kind of info I was interested in.

Kaolian wrote:
There are several proposals out there for an electric or electric hybrid passenger aircraft. Composite fusalage, electric propellers, solar cells over the entire fusalage and wing area. It wouldn't be as fast as a jet, but it theoretically would be much cheaper. They already have some long duration UAV prototypes in the works along those lines, but the main limitation at this point is our reliivly inefficient solar cells. Give things another 5 years, and if solar cell efficiency goes up significantly (which it is looking like it might, with things like the recently discovered black silicon, etc) then I would expect to see design work start on a hybrid solar aircraft. Probably somethign in the short haul class to start.

What about the new solar cloth on the wing surface to complement my ram-turbine system? Not enough surface area on the UAV?
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#11 Oct 29 2008 at 5:35 PM Rating: Decent
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
One thing I remember seeing on live TV which I thought was extremely interesting as a teenager:

They proposed using large lines suspended from orbiting objects to generate electricity. As you move a conductive wire through a magnetic field, it causes current to flow.

I remember probably about 6-8 years ago they tested this. And they showed the footage from the surface of the Earth on live TV. It created generated even more energy than expected and almost instantly incinerated the cable.

After this test though, I never heard anything more of it. It seemed very interesting.


Edit:
Sorry, energy is not created.

Edited, Oct 29th 2008 9:36pm by TirithRR
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#12 Oct 29 2008 at 5:44 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
I'm getting the impression that robbing the Earth of its angular momentum might be a bad idea.
#13 Oct 29 2008 at 5:45 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
Allegory wrote:
The problem with ramjets isn't their basic design, but our current knowledge of chemistry and technological constraints. We are not able to convert the air into a direct fuel source yet. There is no way for an aircraft to power itself by its own velocity through purely mechanical means.

Edited, Oct 29th 2008 8:09pm by Allegory


You really need a hybrid ramjet with a turbine in front of the ramjet, which would convert in flight. Most ramjets are either cylenders or rectangular, but you could easily make them in a curved configuration and then place them in an array around a turbine. Once you hit ideal ramjet speeds, you would have to kill the turbine jet, close it over with an airflow diverter panel of some sort, then open up panels over the ramjet and ignite them. Ramjets aren't very heavy so they wouldn't be a really insurmountable weight issue. They eat fuel way to fast though.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#14 Oct 29 2008 at 5:51 PM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
The ram jet would still require a fuel source such as hydrogen to combust with the air.
#15 Oct 29 2008 at 5:51 PM Rating: Decent
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Allegory wrote:
I'm getting the impression that robbing the Earth of its angular momentum might be a bad idea.


Like the Earth really needs angular momentum... Smiley: oyvey
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#16 Oct 29 2008 at 5:55 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
Allegory wrote:
The ram jet would still require a fuel source such as hydrogen to combust with the air.


You can run them off of Jet A kerosene. They just aren't as efficient as running on Hydrogen.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#17 Oct 29 2008 at 5:56 PM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Baron von tarv wrote:
No the energy transfer loss would mean you wouldn't have enough power to sustain flight.

I know nothing about engineering and just made that up.
It sounded real smart. If you were more patriotic you could run for VP.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#18 Oct 29 2008 at 5:58 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Elinda wrote:
Baron von tarv wrote:
No the energy transfer loss would mean you wouldn't have enough power to sustain flight.

I know nothing about engineering and just made that up.
It sounded real smart. If you were more patriotic you could run for VP.

Hm. They'd have to push through that Schwarzenegger Amendment first...
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#19 Oct 29 2008 at 5:59 PM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
Pumpkin Lörd Kaolian wrote:
You can run them off of Jet A kerosene. They just aren't as efficient as running on Hydrogen.

Well, yes... but that is not exactly powering the aircraft through its own velocity.
#20 Oct 29 2008 at 6:06 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
TirithRR wrote:

After this test though, I never heard anything more of it. It seemed very interesting.


It worked well, the problem is there just aren't many applications for it currently. They have talked about potentially adding such a system to the ISS. Most satilites are too far out in orbit to make effective use of the phenominon, and solar panels weigh less.

Once someone actually bites the bullet and builds a working skyhook space elevator we can use as an extraatmospheric connection point for beaming power over microwave or laser, orbital power sats become a very real possibility. Before then the energy loss associated with beaming power through the atmosphere at a low enough frequincy so as not to boil off the atmosphere would be horribly wasteful and require something like a 1200 mile square reciever antenna.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#21 Oct 29 2008 at 6:06 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
Allegory wrote:
Pumpkin Lörd Kaolian wrote:
You can run them off of Jet A kerosene. They just aren't as efficient as running on Hydrogen.

Well, yes... but that is not exactly powering the aircraft through its own velocity.


Neither is running it off hydrogen...
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#22 Oct 29 2008 at 6:13 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
TirithRR wrote:
One thing I remember seeing on live TV which I thought was extremely interesting as a teenager:

They proposed using large lines suspended from orbiting objects to generate electricity. As you move a conductive wire through a magnetic field, it causes current to flow.

I remember probably about 6-8 years ago they tested this. And they showed the footage from the surface of the Earth on live TV. It created generated even more energy than expected and almost instantly incinerated the cable.

After this test though, I never heard anything more of it. It seemed very interesting.

This reminds me of something I saw on GTV some time ago, inflatable tethered wind turbines designed to float up to and take advantage of constant high-elevation windstreams.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#23 Oct 29 2008 at 6:14 PM Rating: Good
I believe the penultimate method for testing such an aircraft would require a giant treadmill. The ultimate method would involve a tiny plane and a regular-sized treadmill.
#24 Oct 29 2008 at 6:22 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Grandfather Barkingturtle wrote:
I believe the penultimate method for testing such an aircraft would require a giant treadmill. The ultimate method would involve a tiny plane and a regular-sized treadmill.

I never saw the result of that episode. Though it seems obvious; if a plane is on a treadmill it remains stationary, therefore no wind moves over the wings to cause lift.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#25 Oct 29 2008 at 6:31 PM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
Pumpkin Lörd Kaolian wrote:
Neither is running it off hydrogen...

Yes, which is what I said earlier.
#26 Oct 29 2008 at 6:40 PM Rating: Good
I think as long as it had an initial energy source, like a battery, before it clicked over to an air engine, it's possible in theory.



Edited, Oct 29th 2008 10:44pm by catwho
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 242 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (242)