Tweet
I had a thought....I have them often
:p
I love the SeaView. I am into all things that pertain to physics.
I like to combine the two. I was reading the Debor report by Mr Merriman.
I was thinking why has no one made a Dynamic Testing Tub?
It would involve the use of red dye and a continual force of water from one end that could exit the other and the sub would be right in the middle.
The sub would remain static held in position. The way the dyed water flowed over the sub would indicate clearly the way different R&D surfaces interfaced with the flow of water over the sub. Maybe too "deep" for RC but the military does it all the time.
Just a thought
Blah
:p
I love the SeaView. I am into all things that pertain to physics.
I like to combine the two. I was reading the Debor report by Mr Merriman.
CORRECTION! As I was preparing this article, working up an analysis of the cause/effect issues relating to the SEAVIEW's in- water performance - specifically, a study of the forces encountered by the canards/manta-fins at the bow as they cut through the high slip flow of water about the yaw axis, and the lateral and torsional forces these surfaces produce as a consequence of that water flow - I failed to correctly interpret a force-diagram.
I lack the skill to employ mathematical analysis. Nor do I have the ability to instrument, record, and chart the forces on or near the body in motion. The magnitude of the forces acting on the body are unknown to me. However, I can and do ascertain direction and causation of those forces as a consequence of vehicle motion through the fluid. I graphically represent the vectors of force resulting from hull and appendage impingement with the fluid: diagrams, that when represented correctly, permit me to understand why the submarine behaves the way it does.
I mistakenly inverted the direction of the torque moments present at the tips of the SEAVIEW's manta-fins. Which led to a flawed analysis, a dumb mistake, that led me to declare in this forum that the SEAVIEW's manta-fins exacerbated the unwanted, sometimes dangerous rolling turn. A wrong statement!
I lack the skill to employ mathematical analysis. Nor do I have the ability to instrument, record, and chart the forces on or near the body in motion. The magnitude of the forces acting on the body are unknown to me. However, I can and do ascertain direction and causation of those forces as a consequence of vehicle motion through the fluid. I graphically represent the vectors of force resulting from hull and appendage impingement with the fluid: diagrams, that when represented correctly, permit me to understand why the submarine behaves the way it does.
I mistakenly inverted the direction of the torque moments present at the tips of the SEAVIEW's manta-fins. Which led to a flawed analysis, a dumb mistake, that led me to declare in this forum that the SEAVIEW's manta-fins exacerbated the unwanted, sometimes dangerous rolling turn. A wrong statement!
It would involve the use of red dye and a continual force of water from one end that could exit the other and the sub would be right in the middle.
The sub would remain static held in position. The way the dyed water flowed over the sub would indicate clearly the way different R&D surfaces interfaced with the flow of water over the sub. Maybe too "deep" for RC but the military does it all the time.
Just a thought
Blah
Comment