Peter,

 

Thanks for this interesting response.  It would seem to be the last word on 
this subject, for a time.   But we’ll see.  

 

I wonder if there is any chance you would make an electronic copy of your 
article available to the list?

 

No reason for us all to continue to live in darkness.  

 

Nick   

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
[email protected]
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2011 1:22 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [FRIAM] VORTICAL FLOWS and LIFT

 

The videos are wonderful, and I thank Nick, and agree with his opinion.  As for 
the Theory of Tornadoes, it seems that to date it's literally a case of "God 
only knows"!  But mebbe Friam, too.  I have 1/2 century background teaching 
grad fluid mechanics at Caltech, Stanford, and USC and have done a lot of 
meteorological field work, but really wouldn't try to discuss the subject.  I 
jus' dunno. 

 

One should remember that what one sees is a LOT less than what one gets, 
because that's where the tracer happens to be.  This I expressed vividly to my 
students in auto design, when we took pix of airflow near bluff vehicles on 
test tracks in the Mohave Desert.  A'course there is a huge billowing plume 
that presages before, and persists long after the vehicle is over the horizon. 
I remind them that it was not the "dust" doing this, but the air, and an 
identical disturbance occurs invisibly whenever a body passes through air.  To 
paraphrase, "its bite is just as keen, although it is not seen"! Makes one take 
car streamlining seriously.  I actually hold patents on one of those drag 
shield things that goes on the cab of a tractor-trailer rig, that was developed 
on NSF funding at our test base near El Mirage in the Mohave.  Does good things 
for fuel consumption.

 

It would seem likely that the sense of the vorticity in a tornado is related to 
the shear and Coriolis Effect ( Gaspard-G, 1835), although which way, I know 
not.  I was manager of a big DOE program called the Coriolis Project for three 
years, so dealt a little with that.  Lotta spin on the ball, there, literally!  
For smaller scale vortical flow Coriolis does not apply.  Some interesting 
anecdotes:  In East Africa, delightful Kikuyu tricksters, stand right on the 
equatorial line and for a few shillings will show you the exit vortex from 
plastic bucket, then move it north over the line a few feet into t'other 
hemisphere and "prove" that it rotates in the opposite direction.  We seen 
this!  Well, it really does, but not because of Gaspard-Gustave.  In the Libyan 
deserts Holy Men will "attack" a dust devil, with much imprecation and flailing 
of a broad sword - and "kill" it.  It just drops to the ground!  You can see 
this.  With your own eyes. Allah is indeed great!   According to Bagnold, a 
great Brit desertologist and fluid mechanicer, whom I have used for some of his 
results, the secret is to determine in advance what the sense of the vortex is, 
and then to enter it on the upwind side, at just the right distance from the 
core, and flail around .  It works, too.  Ralph Bagnold, soldier, explorer and 
scientist,  whose monumental work I'm lucky to have and reference, was 
portrayed in The English Patient.  Pity when one is better known for a movie 
than an important book!

 

The subject of how wings work is a much vexed topic.  I was interested in what 
Nick said, but for my part, I don't think it is like that , and I reckon the 
air doesn't think so either.  Authors, profs, and pilots (and I have been all 
three) are usually wrong on this topic.  I respect only real airfoil designers 
on this issue, and have a few honest-ta-God airfoils named after me, that can 
be seen on the internet and in books.  They all worked much better than we 
expected.  In fact they have carried, safely, many men and women to record 
heights. There's an article in the Smithsonian about the first airfoil I 
designed, in 1955, that me delightfool, but authoritarian, Teutonic 
boss-fuhrer, Herr Doktor Oberst Gustave Von ---, refused to name after me.  
Well, it flew nobly for the RAF, carried nuclear payloads in the good old, bad 
old days and kept the Ruzskies at bay.  Mebbe!.

 

I have given up noting the incorrect theories on lift.  Life too short for 
that, although if one restricts one's discussion to things one knows 
conversation gets pretty limited.  I am content to simply observe what the air 
does, and weakly agree with it, much as my intellect may reject that 
pusillanimous attitude.   As an expert witness, I have frequently quoted: 
"Theory crumbles before the Facts".  Juries like it.   But some years ago, 
while on the USC aero faculty, I decided to quit pointing out mistakes and 
publish my idea of the Truth.  The paper (1996) is The Meaning of Lift, 
published as  AIAA 34 th Aerospace Sciences Meeting, paper 96-1191. Funny thing 
is that, as a joke, I started calling it The Meaning of Life, and that has made 
it difficult to find by computer, but not by real people!   Well, wot the Hell, 
for me and most of my fellow spirits up in the Big Blue, Lift IS Life!  

Peter Lissaman, Da Vinci Ventures

Expertise is not knowing everything, but knowing what to look for.

1454 Miracerros Loop South, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505,USA
tel:(505)983-7728 

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Reply via email to