| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 00:28:20 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote: On 05 Jun 2004 22:44:53 GMT, (Shen44) wrote: the basic issue (propwalk) is caused by prop rotation and all other factors may assist or decrease it, but the basic "phenom" occurs when you rotate the prop. ============================================ Of course, but what is the cause of the asymetric thrust? THAT is the question. Everyone agrees that a prop with a horizontal shaft still exhibits prop walk, implying that the bottom the prop is more efficient at providing thrust than the top. Lots of theories have been provided but none that seem totally convincing since prop walk still exists to one degree or another on deep props, that have plenty of hull clearance. That's probably because it's a combination of several effects that all contribute. Anyone who throws any theory out there that contains as part of it's explanation some way that the thrust on one part of the prop is different than on another part of the prop is probably correct. Also, any explanation that contains part of it's explanation some way tha the thrust from the prop gets translated into a rotational force on the boat is probably correct. For instance, no matter how deep the prop, the water on the lower side is still going to be under ambient higher pressure than the water on the top. So by moving the prop far away from the hull you may have minimized the effect of hull turbulence on the top part of the prop. But you haven't done anything about the pressure difference. Steve |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
no matter how deep the prop, the water on the lower side
is still going to be under ambient higher pressure than the water on the top. the pressure difference due to water depth is inconsequential. The pressure change is less than 0.5 pound per foot of depth. the compressibility of water is near zero. even on a 15" prop, the center of effort difference between top and bottom blades is less than about a foot. These ar truly miniscule forces as compared to the force needed to move a multi-thousand pound boat in a noticeable fashion. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
wait a minute. wasn't it you that claimed the alleged p-thrust was actually
spiral prop wash on the rudder? Yup, that was you. So how come you are now telling us that making the rudder *bigger* would stop this alleged p-thrust? dumb. including P-51's? Especially the P-51....... .....it is a lesson in what happens with a design employing too small control surface(s) for slow speeds. The P-51 was a purpose built aircraft made to fly high and fast.... ground handling and slow speed flight was sacrificed to this end. It was impossible to manually hold this aircraft on the runway if you forgot to trim the rudder. Ground handling, take-off, and landing in this aircraft was so poor that some British divisions suffered losses of as much as 60% just trying to learn how to fly the thing. Uh..... ever flown one? Wanna go there? -- 23' Grady White, out of Southport, NC. http://myworkshop.idleplay.net/cavern/ Homepage http://www.southharbourvillageinn.com/directions.asp Where Southport,NC is located. http://southharbourvillageinn.linksysnet.com Real Time Pictures at My Marina http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ok, teach...... tell me about how a prop-powered space ship
works..... I said nothing whatsoever about a prop-powered space ship. you did. I did say that "action/reaction" -- as in either a rocket ship OR of a boat prop -- means that neither "pushes" against anything at all. Than means that thrust comes from the action/reaction of the prop and water NOT action of the prop and reaction of the hull. dumb, you are. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
gene, I am sure you don't realize it, but your post below states you believe
aircraft spiral left as they fly. way to go, gene. wait a minute. wasn't it you that claimed the alleged p-thrust was actually spiral prop wash on the rudder? Yup, that was you. So how come you are now telling us that making the rudder *bigger* would stop this alleged p-thrust? dumb. Jax your post is idiotic. (2) The rudder is the only tool available to *counteract* the left turning tendency (including "p-thrust") of the aircraft. The bigger the rudder the more command available at slow speeds. Unless, of course, JaxWorld pilots take off dragging the right brake....what do they do when the main gear comes off the ground? -- 23' Grady White, out of Southport, NC. http://myworkshop.idleplay.net/cavern/ Homepage http://www.southharbourvillageinn.com/directions.asp Where Southport,NC is located. http://southharbourvillageinn.linksysnet.com Real Time Pictures at My Marina http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
gene, your comprehension of English is sadly lacking. you agreed with this
statement AND disagreed. You agreed by stating the spiral prop wash caused the aircraft to turn (thus smaller rudder is better) and disagreed by stating that a larger rudder will stop the spiral prop wash. English does confuse you, doesn't it gene. (1) Please cite the post where I said that a smaller rudder would stop "p-thrust." |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Another wrong assumption, Jax.....
it was not an assumption, gene. it was a statement of fact. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Stainless Prop selection question | General | |||
| Prop shaft Part#44-824110 | General | |||
| Group newbie with a prop question... | General | |||
| Prop Question... Part II | General | |||
| Prop question | General | |||