Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #584331
| Path | csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
| Newsgroups | sci.physics |
| Subject | Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure |
| Date | Sat, 11 Jun 2016 17:38:38 -0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Lines | 46 |
| Sender | Jim Pennino <jimp@mail.specsol.com> |
| Message-ID | <utut2d-9o9.ln1@mail.specsol.com> (permalink) |
| References | <62d14089-98a3-461b-aa56-7fd9b3a38007@googlegroups.com> <453542ae-cd8c-4447-83b0-58655471c044@googlegroups.com> <mq2p2d-jvm.ln1@mail.specsol.com> <36700283-349b-4aef-8e13-4a14dd733fa7@googlegroups.com> <t71q2d-p0q.ln1@mail.specsol.com> <07e56ba3-9ceb-4b0a-b65f-7586249be835@googlegroups.com> <3mnr2d-hd2.ln1@mail.specsol.com> <5b47f95b-50b8-420e-b53b-63ef9afdecfe@googlegroups.com> <qgis2d-315.ln1@mail.specsol.com> <ec05fe4b-f839-4b5b-993a-82517617a93f@googlegroups.com> |
| Injection-Info | mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="db4120ef82bbc153014637d4cd15a795"; logging-data="9018"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19PBNWjktxacEGAgdagxSDK" |
| User-Agent | tin/2.2.1-20140504 ("Tober an Righ") (UNIX) (SunOS/5.10 (i86pc)) |
| Cancel-Lock | sha1:JKBlUn1unX1VngL+tdx9USMEzH8= |
| Xref | csiph.com sci.physics:584331 |
Show key headers only | View raw
Bret Cahill <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> For the third time, why is the Reynolds number of any sphere, of any size, >> >> >> >> and of any material always the same number? >> >> >> > >> >> >> > If the diameter or "characteristic dimension" is larger or smaller, you get a larger or smaller Nre. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > If the velocity in inversely proportional to diameter then the Nre is the same for all sizes of that shape in that fluid, i.e. a golf ball going 300 km/hr has the same Nre as a cyclist helmet going 30 km/hr and the air holes in the helmet actually _reduce_ drag like the dimples on the golf ball reduce drag. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Maybe you meant the Reynolds number can be applied to any size object. >> >> >> >> >> >> The Reynolds number is directly proportional to the diameter of the >> >> >> cross section, so the comment about size is incorrect. >> >> >> >> >> >> Equal sized spheres, no matter the material, be they soap bubbles or lead, >> >> >> have the same Reynolds number. >> >> > >> >> > The speeds would need to be the same as well, a rare coincidence because >> >> > soap bubbles always move slowly w/ respect to wind speed. >> >> >> >> As the Reynolds number is directly proportional to velocity, >> > >> > then different speeds => different Nre. >> > >> >> comparing >> >> Reynolds numbers at differing speeds >> > >> > A golf ball going 300 km/hr has the same Nre as a cyclist helmet going >> > 30 km/hr because the helmet ix 10X bigger than the ball. >> > >> > The air holes in the helmet actually _reduce_ drag like the dimples on >> > the golf ball reduce drag. >> > >> > The reason is the speeds and diameters are different but the Nre are >> > the same, 50K - 100K where dimpling works. >> >> As Reynolds number is dependant on speed as you have realized, > > Speed as well as diameter. > > A small high speed object can have the same Nre as a large low speed object. Therefor talking about Reynolds number without speed is pointless. -- Jim Pennino
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Bret Cahill <bretcahill@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 12:47 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-05 02:11 +0000
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Bret Cahill <bretcahill@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 22:22 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-05 17:36 +0000
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Bret Cahill <bretcahill@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 13:52 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-05 22:56 +0000
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Bret Cahill <bretcahill@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 00:57 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-08 19:27 +0000
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 19:16 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-09 02:52 +0000
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 06:55 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-09 16:22 +0000
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 13:23 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-09 21:14 +0000
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 14:49 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Bret Cahill <bretcahill@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 19:46 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-10 05:53 +0000
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Bret Cahill <bretcahill@aol.com> - 2016-06-10 10:07 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-10 17:49 +0000
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-10 21:22 +0000
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Bret Cahill <bretcahill@aol.com> - 2016-06-10 19:40 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-11 05:00 +0000
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Bret Cahill <bretcahill@aol.com> - 2016-06-11 01:13 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-11 17:38 +0000
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Bret Cahill <bretcahill@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 00:58 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 07:23 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Bret Cahill <bretcahill@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 14:18 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-06-08 16:26 -0500
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-08 21:41 +0000
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-06-08 20:23 -0400
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-09 00:34 +0000
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-06-08 21:07 -0400
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-06-08 19:22 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-06-09 02:36 +0000
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Bret Cahill <bretcahill@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 14:42 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Bret Cahill <bretcahill@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 20:20 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Bret Cahill <bretcahill@aol.com> - 2016-06-10 10:10 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Bret Cahill <bretcahill@aol.com> - 2016-06-11 11:02 -0700
Re: PV Dirigible Prop Alternative To Super Pressure Bret Cahill <bretcahill@aol.com> - 2016-06-10 20:11 -0700
csiph-web