4 ms·
I've often wondered if there might be a more efficient propulsion design using modern materials, using something like a whale's fluke, or some flapping wings. S
by knodi123 4y ago
I've often wondered if there might be a more efficient propulsion design using modern materials, using something like a whale's fluke, or some flapping wings. Seems like in addition to personal zeppelins, there's room to innovate with more biological designs.
- perilunar 4y agoThe trick to efficiency is to accelerate more mass at a lower delta v. Doesn't matter if it's rotating or oscillating. I.e. long flapping wings/tail or long, slow propellor blades. One benefit of an airship is large propellors are more practical than on a small plane.
- jacquesm 4y agoTears for Fears and Brittany Murphy have you covered: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQ9NERE5OHw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQ9NERE5OHw
- perilunar 4y agoAlso see the Festo Air Ray: https://www.festo.com/us/en/e/about-festo/research-and-development/bionic-learning-network/highlights-from-2006-to-2009/air-ray-id_33851/ https://www.festo.com/us/en/e/about-festo/research-and-devel...
- knodi123 4y agoThat's exactly the kind of thing I was imagining, thanks! And from 2010 no less!
- addaon 4y agoPropellers are usually up around 85% efficient at their design speed (with fixed pitch propellers falling off very rapidly away from this design speed, and variable pitch props having a flatter optimum). There's room for improvement here, but not a game-changing amount. A larger, slower prop captures most of the potential improvement with far less incremental complexity than something completely novel.