Re: Aerodynamics

To: tesla-at-poodle.pupman-dot-com
Subject: Re: Aerodynamics
From: Tesla List <tesla-at-stic-dot-net>
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 1997 04:13:53 -0600
Approved: tesla-at-stic-dot-net

Subject: 
        Re: Aerodynamics
  Date: 
        Mon, 31 Mar 1997 23:27:43 -0500 (EST)
  From: 
        richard hull <rhull-at-richmond.infi-dot-net>
    To: 
        Tesla List <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>

>
>Richard
>
>An excellent point. One of my sons is an aerodynamicist. I will be
>presenting him with the problem today and ask him to make
>recommendations as to electrode shape, size and velocity. There should
>also be a way to provide baffles on the rotor to break up the low
>pressure area behind the moving point, the same way it's done on cars
>and airplanes. Will publish his comments on the list.
>
>Skip
>
>Skip, 

Good thinkin'!  The baffles might be the simplest overall solution. 
Before
you put the boy on the trail, help him out and tell him drag is of zero
concern whatsoever.  We have the power to drive car doors, slab sided! 
This
will keep him from needlessly being concerned about aerodynamic drag,
the
absolute bugaboo of the aerodynamicist!  It should also yiled a much
simpler
and more cost effective solution.  This should reduce down to a simple
fluid
flow problem.

I talked over the last year or so with Charles Yost of ESJ about this
problem and he is an aerodynamic engineer retired from NASA!  My
suggestions
and comments in the original post were based on this discussions.  The
bottom line in this matter is, regardless of solution, does it improve
operation and quench.

Richard Hull, TCBOR