EcoModder Forum "Faster than the wind," impossible they say but the Blackbird settles the debate

Register Now
 Remember

Master EcoModder

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 12,784
Thanks: 20,500
Thanked 6,307 Times in 3,907 Posts
10-mph from 7-mph

Quote:
 Originally Posted by ennored That's how I understand it. Traveling at say, 10 MPH, with a 7 MPH tailwind, you have 10 MPH of groundspeed to overcome a 3 MPH headwind.
1) if the 'phenomena' of Rick Cavallero are of aerodynamic origin, then they are governed by the same principles as all aerodynamic phenomena.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If tested in a laboratory, I believe that you will find that:
A) the vehicle ground velocity never exceeded the wind speed.
B) at sub-critical Reynolds number, laminar boundary layer, all flow across the vehicle was separated.
C) the 'tattle' at the vehicle's nose was being pulled backwards into the low-pressure turbulent wake of the separated flow.
D) the backwards-facing tattle gave the 'appearance' of headwind, when in fact, that never existed.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Believing that a 'headwind' actually existed, Rick Cavallero's mind made the leap, concluding that he'd done the impossible, re-writing fluid mechanics and thermodynamics.
' Man believes what he wants to believe.'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If anyone wants to spend a little time studying Sir Issac Newton's second law, pertaining to force/ mass/ velocity/ time/ momentum/ inertia/ impulse, you'll see that this theory of Cavallero's was dead before it was ever mentioned.

__________________

 Today Popular topics Other popular topics in this forum...
Master EcoModder

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Silly-Con Valley
Posts: 1,453
Thanks: 185
Thanked 250 Times in 188 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by aerohead The only corollary which applies for 'with-the-wind' would be flying a spinnaker....
But we're not talking about sailing with the wind. And the propeller blades are not turning with the wind--when they turn, they are meeting it at an angle!

-soD

 The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to some_other_dave For This Useful Post: aerohead (06-23-2021), RedDevil (06-19-2021), samwichse (06-19-2021)
 06-19-2021, 06:25 AM #23 (permalink) In the fasting lane     Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: Nieuwegein, the Netherlands Posts: 3,928 Red Devil - '11 Honda Insight Elegance Team Honda 90 day: 52.67 mpg (US) It - '09 Hyundai I10 Active Cool Team Hyundai 90 day: 31.45 mpg (US) Thanks: 1,661 Thanked 2,179 Times in 1,408 Posts No amount of proof will ever convince anyone who does not understand the principle. And those wo do understand the principle know it should work, and proof is just confirmation. So please try to understand the principle. It is a real Aha! moment when you see it. I'll try to explain with a stepwise approach. Fact - You cannot blow a sail with the wind past wind speed. But if you take a very long boat and you put the mast on a cart inside the boat and you push that cart towards the stern, then the boat would move faster than if the sail was fixed. The boat would move faster than the wind if you push hard enough. I think you can agree that would work. Instead of a sail we use a propeller. Instead of a boat we use a car. If we motorize the propeller to push against the wind, of course we could move faster than the wind. With our motorized cart, the force that drives the car forward is the forward pressure on the propeller that transfers through the axle bearings. All obvious, right? Now comes the tricky part. We set the motor speed such that the propeller turns against the wind but slightly slower that the wind speed. The car will speed up beyond the wind speed, as the wind is still pushing against the propeller as its surface moves slower than the wind. Even though the propeller forces the air backwards compared to the car, it still moves forward compared to the ground - but slower than the wind, while the car moves faster than the wind. The wind still pushes against the propeller so the car still accelerates. Because the car still accelerates in those conditions we might tap some of that energy to drive the propeller. The force needed to do so is less than the forward force on the propeller, as long as the propeller pushes the air backwards ar a slower speed than the car is moving. We don't need the motor after all as long as the overall friction is less than the difference between the forward force on the propeller and the driving force turning it against the wind. It is the gearing that makes it possible. Likewise when you have a big sail and a system of pulleys to rile in the boom. If you let go of the rope the wind will catch the sail and the rope end will speed up way past the wind speed. Here the sail is a propeller, the pulleys are the gearing and the rope end is the car. As for proof, the wind vane on the car is all you need. Of course the wind speed is lower close to the ground, but it is enduring quite a strong virtual headwind; much more than you'd expect. There is a headwind even right in front of the propeller; in fact the headwind there should be even slightly stronger as the propeller slows the wind speed down, so it is a higher headwind relative to the car. __________________ 2011 Honda Insight + HID, LEDs, tiny PV panel, extra brake pad return springs, neutral wheel alignment, 44/42 PSI (air), PHEV light (inop), tightened wheel nut. lifetime FE over 0.17 Gmeter or 0.1 Mmile. Investors woes: "In hindsight, I should have placed a bet on the horse that won the race" "In hindsight, I should have bet more on that horse" Last edited by RedDevil; 06-19-2021 at 07:25 AM..
 The Following User Says Thank You to RedDevil For This Useful Post: aerohead (06-25-2021)
Master EcoModder

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 12,784
Thanks: 20,500
Thanked 6,307 Times in 3,907 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by some_other_dave But we're not talking about sailing with the wind. And the propeller blades are not turning with the wind--when they turn, they are meeting it at an angle! -soD
1) according to Newtonian physics, the wind from behind is supplying an 'impulse' of the force (F), over a period of time. (F delta-t)
2) F delta-t = ( delta- momentum ) [ delta-p ]
3) Momentum (p) = mass-times-velocity, or p= mv
4) impulse of the force (F) = delta-p/ delta-t
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* the vehicle, with wind from behind, is a crude square-rigger.
* it's aerodynamic drag creates enough force to accelerate the vehicle, from rest V=zero, to some terminal velocity V2.
* while the vehicle is accelerating, it is building momentum as it's mass is being accelerated.
* under the force of the wind, the vehicle's wheel is transmitting power from the road/tire interface, through the wheel bearings, to the differential, to the lower sprocket, to the chain, to the upper sprocket, through the pillow block bearings, to the shaft, to the propeller, to the air, creating a counter-impulse.
* there's a specific, fixed amount of kinetic energy contained in the wind.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* If we presumed that the vehicle was a 'perfect' sail, and could extract all the available energy from the wind, we would still be losing energy at the tire/ ground interface/ within the tires themselves/ within the wheel bearings, within the differential gears/ at the lower sprocket-to-chain interface/ within every link pivot within the chain/ within the upper chain-to-sprocket interface/ within the two pillow-block bearings-to-jackshaft interface/ and finally at the propeller-to-air interface.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Whatever amount of energy is delivered to the vehicle, that amount, less all the powertrain losses, is what is available at the propeller-to-atmosphere coupling.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a) when the vehicle reaches the air speed, there is no delta-v
b) acceleration is now zero, v= constant, momentum = constant
c) whatever net-momentum exists in the vehicle, it must have a lower amount of net energy than that the surrounding airstream due to aerodynamic slippage, and rolling resistance on dirt ( very high! )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
d) in order for the propeller to push the vehicle beyond the local air velocity, would require zero aerodynamic slippage, zero rolling resistance, zero powertrain losses, and a propeller wing section exhibiting a lift-to-drag ratio at over-unity, since it's being supplied less energy than is available from it's surroundings.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* All wing sections have a zero-lift angle of attack
* As soon as a wing begins to produce lift, it's also producing drag ( another drain on available energy )
* At maximum lift, all airfoils are producing maximum drag
* All thrusting airfoil sections are 'angled', so, an
'angled' propeller blade cannot be some new, unique quality of Rick Cavallero's system, not seen in other aerodynamic systems.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Somehow, the phenomenon of the backward's oriented tattle-tale, has convinced observers of a reality which cannot exist in our universe.
__________________

Last edited by aerohead; 06-23-2021 at 11:58 AM.. Reason: typo

 The Following User Says Thank You to aerohead For This Useful Post: Xist (07-03-2021)
 06-23-2021, 02:00 PM #25 (permalink) Eco-ventor     Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: sweden Posts: 1,541 Princess - '92 Mazda MX-3 GS House of TudorTeam Mazda 90 day: 53.54 mpg (US) Shirubāarō (*´ω｀*) - '05 Toyota Prius Executive Team Toyota 90 day: 54.88 mpg (US) Blue Thunder - '20 Hyundai IONIQ Trend PHEV Team HyundaiPlug-in Hybrids Thanks: 68 Thanked 629 Times in 399 Posts It seems involving wind and propellers obfuscates the principle too much, let me instead ask: Can a cart pulled by a rope go faster than the rope? (Nothing else powers the cart.) __________________ 2016: 128.75L for 1875.00km => 6.87L/100km (34.3MPG US) 2017: 209.14L for 4244.00km => 4.93L/100km (47.7MPG US)
 The Following User Says Thank You to jakobnev For This Useful Post: aerohead (06-23-2021)
Master EcoModder

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 12,784
Thanks: 20,500
Thanked 6,307 Times in 3,907 Posts
rope

Quote:
 Originally Posted by jakobnev It seems involving wind and propellers obfuscates the principle too much, let me instead ask: Can a cart pulled by a rope go faster than the rope? (Nothing else powers the cart.)
1) Is the rope inelastic or elastic?
2) Are you measuring rope velocity at the rope/cart connection point, or the prime mover/rope connection point velocity?
__________________

 The Following User Says Thank You to aerohead For This Useful Post: Xist (07-03-2021)
 06-23-2021, 03:06 PM #27 (permalink) Eco-ventor     Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: sweden Posts: 1,541 Princess - '92 Mazda MX-3 GS House of TudorTeam Mazda 90 day: 53.54 mpg (US) Shirubāarō (*´ω｀*) - '05 Toyota Prius Executive Team Toyota 90 day: 54.88 mpg (US) Blue Thunder - '20 Hyundai IONIQ Trend PHEV Team HyundaiPlug-in Hybrids Thanks: 68 Thanked 629 Times in 399 Posts 1) The rope is perfectly inelastic. 2) All motion is relative to the road. __________________ 2016: 128.75L for 1875.00km => 6.87L/100km (34.3MPG US) 2017: 209.14L for 4244.00km => 4.93L/100km (47.7MPG US)
 The Following User Says Thank You to jakobnev For This Useful Post: aerohead (06-23-2021)
 06-23-2021, 03:12 PM #28 (permalink) EV convert     Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: NewMexico (USA) Posts: 9,418 Sub - '84 Chevy Diesel Suburban C10 SUV 90 day: 19.5 mpg (US) camaro - '85 Chevy Camaro Z28 Riot - '03 Kia Rio POS Team Hyundai 90 day: 30.21 mpg (US) Bug - '01 VW Beetle GLSturbo 90 day: 26.43 mpg (US) Sub2500 - '86 GMC Suburban C2500 90 day: 11.95 mpg (US) Snow flake - '11 Nissan Leaf SL SUV 90 day: 141.63 mpg (US) Thanks: 226 Thanked 3,082 Times in 2,405 Posts 1 build a wind car your self. 2 disprove the observation. I'm inclined to believe the guy who built the the thing and did the thing. __________________ 1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L diesel turbocharged with a Garrett T76 and Holset HE351VE, 22:1 compression 13psi of intercooled boost. 1989 firebird mostly stock. Aside from the 6-speed manual trans, corvette gen 5 front brakes, 1LE drive shaft, 4th Gen disc brake fbody rear end. 2011 leaf SL, white, portable 240v CHAdeMO, trailer hitch, new batt as of 2014.
 The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to oil pan 4 For This Useful Post: aerohead (06-23-2021), RedDevil (06-24-2021)
Master EcoModder

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 12,784
Thanks: 20,500
Thanked 6,307 Times in 3,907 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by jakobnev 1) The rope is perfectly inelastic. 2) All motion is relative to the road.
Would you please define the road, cart, and any topological or environmental considerations?
__________________

Master EcoModder

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 12,784
Thanks: 20,500
Thanked 6,307 Times in 3,907 Posts
disproved

Quote:
 Originally Posted by oil pan 4 1 build a wind car your self. 2 disprove the observation. I'm inclined to believe the guy who built the the thing and did the thing.
Observation does not establish causality.
His remarkable claim requires the remarkable evidence to back it up.
He can submit his creation for third-party testing.
NASA Ames is the only laboratory large enough to test it.
In the meantime, it's 'cold fusion.'

__________________