Jet Engine Placement

> 10 years ago
Reply
Register to post, see what you've read, and subscribe to topics.
evlPanda
evlPanda
NSW
9207 posts
NSW, 9207 posts
16 Feb 2009 1:29pm
Shouldn't jet engines be in front of the wing, not under it? It is after all air rushing over the wing/being redirected that produces lift.

Obviously this needs some work to deal with the heat et al.

(I am just brainstorming)
Cambodge
Cambodge
VIC
851 posts
VIC, 851 posts
16 Feb 2009 2:12pm
I suspect the exhaust gas from a jet engine is highly turbulent (i.e. swirling around) whereas a wing works best with laminar airflow (i.e. smooth and straight) to generate lift.

With laminar airflow the air passing over the top of the wing has to go faster than the air passing under the wing. The difference in speeds between the air over the top and the air unde the bottom creates a pressure differential (higher pressure under teh wing, lower pressure above the wing) which creates the effect of "lift".
nebbian
nebbian
WA
6277 posts
WA, 6277 posts
16 Feb 2009 1:03pm
Cambodge said...
With laminar airflow the air passing over the top of the wing has to go faster than the air passing under the wing. The difference in speeds between the air over the top and the air unde the bottom creates a pressure differential (higher pressure under teh wing, lower pressure above the wing) which creates the effect of "lift".


*sigh*


Angling the thrust of the engines slightly downward would give some lift as well.
Karve
Karve
VIC
197 posts
VIC, 197 posts
16 Feb 2009 3:39pm
I would be more worried about the 800 deg c exhaust gases going straight on to the fuel tank (wing)
evlPanda
evlPanda
NSW
9207 posts
NSW, 9207 posts
16 Feb 2009 4:15pm
Cambodge said...

I suspect the exhaust gas from a jet engine is highly turbulent (i.e. swirling around) whereas a wing works best with laminar airflow (i.e. smooth and straight) to generate lift.


Ah, yes. True.


With laminar airflow the air passing over the top of the wing has to go faster than the air passing under the wing. The difference in speeds between the air over the top and the air unde the bottom creates a pressure differential (higher pressure under teh wing, lower pressure above the wing) which creates the effect of "lift".


Common myth, why does the air have to go faster?
Cambodge
Cambodge
VIC
851 posts
VIC, 851 posts
16 Feb 2009 5:53pm
I thought the air had to go faster over the top of the wing 'cos there's futher for it to travel in the same amount of time to keep up with the air under the wing (i.e. the wing has more 'camber' on the top).

I guess not.

Time to check out the Bernoulli effect on Wikipedia
nebbian
nebbian
WA
6277 posts
WA, 6277 posts
16 Feb 2009 4:00pm
A better place to start is this one:

www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/wrong1.html
evlPanda
evlPanda
NSW
9207 posts
NSW, 9207 posts
16 Feb 2009 6:17pm
Cambodge said...

I thought the air had to go faster over the top of the wing 'cos there's futher for it to travel in the same amount of time to keep up with the air under the wing (i.e. the wing has more 'camber' on the top).


Everybody thinks that, but think about it.
Why does the air on top have to keep up with the air on the bottom?

What Nebs posted.

Actually how turbulent is the air directly behind a jet engine?

nebbian
nebbian
WA
6277 posts
WA, 6277 posts
16 Feb 2009 5:15pm
To answer the original question, if the jet exhaust flowed around the wing, then it would be a bit like carrying a big fan to blow on your windsurfer sail.

It's more efficient just to use the thrust directly, in the direction that you want, rather than blowing it in the wrong direction and then bending it with an airfoil.




Btw just to be perverse, there are a couple of planes that use jet exhaust and the coanda effect to direct the stream down and generate more lift. I'm at work otherwise I'd find a link...
555
555
892 posts
555 555
892 posts
16 Feb 2009 7:03pm
Ah yes, this old chestnut again..

Bernoulli was not wrong. His equation is just mis-applied, as is Newtons.

From later on in the NASA stuff:
"When a gas flows over an object, or when an object moves through a gas, the molecules of the gas are free to move about the object; they are not closely bound to one another as in a solid. Because the molecules move, there is a velocity associated with the gas. Within the gas, the velocity can have very different values at different places near the object. Bernoulli's equation, which was named for Daniel Bernoulli, relates the pressure in a gas to the local velocity; so as the velocity changes around the object, the pressure changes as well. Adding up (integrating) the pressure variation times the area around the entire body determines the aerodynamic force on the body. The lift is the component of the aerodynamic force which is perpendicular to the original flow direction of the gas. The drag is the component of the aerodynamic force which is parallel to the original flow direction of the gas. Now adding up the velocity variation around the object instead of the pressure variation also determines the aerodynamic force. The integrated velocity variation around the object produces a net turning of the gas flow. From Newton's third law of motion, a turning action of the flow will result in a re-action (aerodynamic force) on the object. So both "Bernoulli" and "Newton" are correct. Integrating the effects of either the pressure or the velocity determines the aerodynamic force on an object. We can use equations developed by each of them to determine the magnitude and direction of the aerodynamic force. "
nebbian
nebbian
WA
6277 posts
WA, 6277 posts
16 Feb 2009 10:44pm
Here's one link, not the one I was thinking of but it will do:

www.symscape.com/blog/air-blowing-applications

The front jet engines on an Ekranoplan can direct their exhaust nozzles toward the main wing, thus providing lift independently of forward speed to aid in lifting the giant vehicles clear of the water.

When googling this, on page two of the results I found my own post which I made a couple of hours ago! Yikes! Since when has google been that fast?
Greenfinger
Greenfinger
WA
239 posts
WA, 239 posts
17 Feb 2009 12:27am
How come aircraft can fly inverted ? (upside down)
Why do paper airplanes fly ? (no airfoil)
Angle of attack ?
Dawn Patrol
Dawn Patrol
WA
1991 posts
WA, 1991 posts
17 Feb 2009 1:00am
Poweeeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.
raggy
raggy
VIC
564 posts
VIC, 564 posts
17 Feb 2009 10:39am
you must also rember that a "jet" engine say a turbofan or turbo shaft engine is not a reaction engine. like a rocket for eg. engine placment has many factors under over fwd aft of a flying surface and air flow is one of those but there are so many more rember that in some cases so of the exhaust is duct. or just shoot it out over the wing eg cessna conquests. fairchild metros or most helicopters
evlPanda
evlPanda
NSW
9207 posts
NSW, 9207 posts
17 Feb 2009 11:10am
nebbian said...


When googling this, on page two of the results I found my own post which I made a couple of hours ago! Yikes! Since when has google been that fast?


I've noticed Seabreeze has massive Google ratings. Congrats Laurie.

Richiefish
Richiefish
QLD
5612 posts
QLD, 5612 posts
17 Feb 2009 10:14am
nebbian said...

A better place to start is this one:

www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/wrong1.html


thats great.
Mark _australia
Mark _australia
WA
23684 posts
WA, 23684 posts
17 Feb 2009 9:45am
i don't care if they build them backwards with engines poking out sideways..... as long as they always stay up
Paradox
Paradox
QLD
1326 posts
QLD, 1326 posts
17 Feb 2009 11:20am
Greenfinger said...

How come aircraft can fly inverted ? (upside down)
Why do paper airplanes fly ? (no airfoil)
Angle of attack ?


A better question would be how do planes fly on thier side - which they do in aerobatics and the Red Bull air races - not for long, but they do stay in place.

As described on that great NASA site (I learnt few things from that ) it is all about a net turning of the gas (air flow) and conservation of energy. The airfoil shape (and Bernoulli's principles) has only a little to do with lift and probably more to do with effeciency and aerodynamics on planes. Although I suspect the foil shape has more influence at lower air speeds - ie sails and kites.

MavericK040
MavericK040
WA
583 posts
WA, 583 posts
17 Feb 2009 10:34pm
Greenfinger said...

How come aircraft can fly inverted ? (upside down)
Why do paper airplanes fly ? (no airfoil)
Angle of attack ?


The aircraft that fly inverted eg Extra 300's and so on have a SYMMETRICAL Airfoil which allows them to generate the same amount of lift as they normally would when they are inverted.
How do they fly at all if they have have equal or no lift on either side of the wing i hear you say?

well thats where angle of attack comes into it, angle of attack is the angle between the wings chord ( line between wing Leading edge or LE and the trailing edge or TE ) and the relative airflow. when you get a positive angle the airfoil generates lift.
when they are flying dead level they dont produce much lift and rely allot on there very powerful engines.

the optimum angle of attack for efficient flying is approximately 4 degrees but it depends on the airfoil type. Most airfoils stall at about 16 degrees. they stall because the boundary layer can no longer "stick" to the wings surface and it breaks away thus laminar flow is no longer there and no lift is generated.

The power to weight ratio of a stunt plane is significantly great then that of a cessna 152 or something like that.

which leads us to why can those stunt planes fly on there side for a while...

Well its because of those 600hp engines up the front there, its called flying on Knife Edge, its mostly the engines thrust holding up the plane but a little of the lift comes from the side area of the Fuselage generating a little lift.

2 years and an A+ in aeronautics at school and 3 years of flying RC aircraft helped answer these questions.

I hope it helps!
japester
japester
VIC
63 posts
VIC, 63 posts
18 Feb 2009 3:27am

A better question would be how do planes fly on thier side - which they do in aerobatics and the Red Bull air races - not for long, but they do stay in place.


Turning around the pylons in racing is done on wing edge because it is the fastest way to turn. It is done with a touch of rudder to keep the plane flying horizontal. The only horizontal surface at that point being the elevator.

The answer is sheer bloody power. R/C aircraft can do the same - even making like a helicopter and just hanging from the prop. There is an awesome video somewhere on youtube of one of the red bull planes losing half a wing during practise and the pilot landed it cleanly.
Greenfinger
Greenfinger
WA
239 posts
WA, 239 posts
18 Feb 2009 1:50am
RC planes can fly knife edge for as long as the pilot can keep em there, even do knife edge loops.
Lifting body ?
Heaps o power to weight...
Snap a wing off, make an aproach in knife edge and level out just before touch down, has been done with success a few times.
Has even been done with a jet fighter as well, but it did'nt really need to knife edge cause of lifting body and smart computers taking over.
Hey Raggy been to see the girls up north lately
Richiefish
Richiefish
QLD
5612 posts
QLD, 5612 posts
18 Feb 2009 10:06am
MavericK040 said...

Greenfinger said...

How come aircraft can fly inverted ? (upside down)
Why do paper airplanes fly ? (no airfoil)
Angle of attack ?


The aircraft that fly inverted eg Extra 300's and so on have a SYMMETRICAL Airfoil which allows them to generate the same amount of lift as they normally would when they are inverted.
How do they fly at all if they have have equal or no lift on either side of the wing i hear you say?

well thats where angle of attack comes into it, angle of attack is the angle between the wings chord ( line between wing Leading edge or LE and the trailing edge or TE ) and the relative airflow. when you get a positive angle the airfoil generates lift.
when they are flying dead level they dont produce much lift and rely allot on there very powerful engines.

the optimum angle of attack for efficient flying is approximately 4 degrees but it depends on the airfoil type. Most airfoils stall at about 16 degrees. they stall because the boundary layer can no longer "stick" to the wings surface and it breaks away thus laminar flow is no longer there and no lift is generated.

The power to weight ratio of a stunt plane is significantly great then that of a cessna 152 or something like that.

which leads us to why can those stunt planes fly on there side for a while...

Well its because of those 600hp engines up the front there, its called flying on Knife Edge, its mostly the engines thrust holding up the plane but a little of the lift comes from the side area of the Fuselage generating a little lift.

2 years and an A+ in aeronautics at school and 3 years of flying RC aircraft helped answer these questions.

I hope it helps!


4 degrees is also a good rudder angle on a sailboat. countering weatherhelm , producing lift .
Cambodge
Cambodge
VIC
851 posts
VIC, 851 posts
18 Feb 2009 1:17pm
Does this mean I should hack into the finbox and reset it at 4 degrees to get super-early planing? Would I still sail straight or would the board travel 4 degrees sideways?

Of course, it'll then be a bugger on the opposite tack.

For you rocket scientists I'm only being semi-serious
Mark _australia
Mark _australia
WA
23684 posts
WA, 23684 posts
18 Feb 2009 1:18pm
what is even more impressive IMHO is helicopters flying upside down. having to reverse collective pitch completely (angling blades the 'wrong' way) in an instant and doing it just the right amount is amazing.
watching 3D flying of RC heli's just does my head in when you realise what they are doing.... how fast they are doing it... and the extreme fine control req'd
TheChad
TheChad
QLD
142 posts
QLD, 142 posts
18 Feb 2009 7:29pm
I'm not sure if anyone does it with planes, but there could be advantages in funneling some of the flow from the back of the jet over, or out of, the top side of the wing.

As this could energize the boundary layer and delay stalling.

F1 teams did a similar thing a few years back with the exits of their exhaust.
They funneled them out through the diffuser.
However they worked out that this was not the best solution.
The diffusers were more effective.
But it meant that the aerodynamic balance changed in relation to throttle application.
Which isn't ideal if you get off the throttle mid way through a high speed corner!
evlPanda
evlPanda
NSW
9207 posts
NSW, 9207 posts
19 Feb 2009 11:44am
^ Were they ever allowed to change the wings "in-flight", as in trim them for the straights? This could be as simple as trimming based on how much the steering wheel is turned.

I see they've changed the rules again:



Edit: PFFT. I just watched the video and answered my own question

Edit Edit: No I haven't.
Please Register, or first...
Topics Subscribe Reply