User talk:Mr swordfish
|Threads older than 31 days may be archived by.|
Formal mediation has been requested
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Would you revise the "Conditions for existence" section in the the Coanda effect article please?
The Conditions for existence section is unnecessarily ultra-technical, as well as being poorly written. I have revised the first half of that section as it simply describes the results of the experiment depicted in the diagram on the right. But it was clear from that exercise that the reciprocal of the h/r ratio (and not the actual h/r ratios as stated) were used both in the original caption to the diagram and in the text! Mistakes like this, plus the poor English, made the section almost incomprehensible. I hope that my rendering of that section has improved matters, even though the diagram to which it refers is unnecessarily complex, having obviously been lifted from a professional journal (or similar text) without the accompanying explanations of what the various codes mean. For instance, what do the water pressure graphs (in cm H2O - labeled "Cm H2O" in the diagram!) in the top left hand corner of the diagram refer to?
The second half of the section starting with the sentence
A calculation made by L. C. Woods in 1954, of an inviscid flow along a circular wall........ needs serious reworking. Only the people who are already thoroughly familiar with Wood's, Young's, Van Dyke's and Kadosch's work would have the slightest inkling what these paragraphs mean, and whether the "h/r ratios" at the bottom of the section (referring to laminar flow over a curved surface) are true h/r ratios or their reciprocals. In fact this section seems to convey nothing other than that these authors have at some stage written about the Coanda effect. Maybe it should simply be deleted, though the information about laminar flow needs to be reported.
This section would make a lot more sense if some of the implications of the work were mentioned. I can think of one implication: since a fluid jet will not adhere to a curved surface at high h/r ratios it means that the airflow over a standard airfoil is not an instance of the Coanda effect, as the "jet" is, for practical purposed, infinitely thick (i.e. h/r has an extremely high value).
Wind-driven vehicles exceeding the speed of the wind
Hi Mr Swordfish. Best wishes for 2017!
User:HopsonRoad has had a lot to do with Forces on sails so you may know his work. He has done some new work and invited comments at Talk:High-performance sailing#Proposed new text. He has also explicitly invited a small number of Users to comment and assist - see diff. You may be interested in contributing. Regards, Dolphin (t) 02:58, 27 January 2017 (UTC)