Sinha FCS Deturbulator update

[Jim Hendrix]

Well, here goes. I'll understand, or try to anyway, if my friends, who used
to think of me as a reasonable, level headed kind of guy, turn and run when
they see me coming down the street.

Maybe it really didn't happen. Maybe it was only a dream. Maybe it was a
calculation error or equipment failure. Maybe someone who really knows how
to test aircraft can see a flaw big enough to make it all go away. Maybe
I'll just end up with egg on my face and that will be that.

But I keep sitting here, looking at this graph, in disbelief. I built the
drag rake, constructed and calibrated the pressure sensor, flew the test
flights, crunched the numbers, plotted the graphs. I can't just write this
off as a kooky claim by someone I never heard of. You have that luxury, not
me.

Sumon, Dr. Sinha, my long time friend and hydrodynamics professor at Ole
Miss, told me a few months ago that he thought we could get 25% profile drag
reduction on my Standard Cirrus wing. "Yea, sure," I thought. "We,ll see."

He had already demonstrated 18% on an NLF0414F airfoil last year in
Starkville, MS. And we easily got the same number at some airspeeds on the
first attempt with my glider which has a very different airfoil. "That was
about it," I thought. "We lucked into the sweet spot and we probably can't
do much better than that."

Then, two days ago, last Saturday, October the 18th, Sumon thought he'd try
a little modification. I knew before landing that there was some
improvement, about 0.12 volts on the pressure sensor at 100 kts and much
smaller improvements at low speeds. (With this sensor, 1 volt is 1 inch
water gauge pressure.) When I got home and processed the data, there it was.
We had essentially doubled the drag reduction we were seeing at speeds over
70 kts and we exceeded 26% improvement at two points, one being the highest
tested speed, 100 kts. The average from 50 to 100 kts was 23.7%. We had
also corrected a low speed roll off so that we now saw basically flat drag
reductions, as a percentage of clean wing values, at all airspeeds from 40
to 100 kts.

Maybe it's a fluke, some huge error. Maybe we won't be able to repeat it
and that will be that. Or, maybe it's real.

For the full details you can take your browser to www.oxaero.com and click
the Sinha Deturbulator and Test Results links.

So there it is. Don't expect me to defend it. I'm happy to let time be the
judge.

Fire away!

[Eric Greenwell]

In article >, jeh1941
@bellsouth.net says...
> So there it is. Don't expect me to defend it. I'm happy to let time be the
> judge.
>
> Fire away!

How about a picture of the device?

An explanation of how it works?

Results of polar measurements confirming the probe results?

An explanation of why you think the pressure measurements the probe
measures are directly proportional to drag when it is in only 40% of
the "flow"?

Why you didn't use little pitot tubes (instead of holes in a block) on
the drag rake, as Althaus thinks is necessary?


--
!Replace DECIMAL.POINT in my e-mail address with just a . to reply
directly

Eric Greenwell
Richland, WA (USA)

[Al]

Screw that...

Where can we buy it :)

Al

"Eric Greenwell" > wrote in message
.. .
> In article >, jeh1941
> @bellsouth.net says...
> > So there it is. Don't expect me to defend it. I'm happy to let time be
the
> > judge.
> >
> > Fire away!
>
> How about a picture of the device?
>
> An explanation of how it works?
>
> Results of polar measurements confirming the probe results?
>
> An explanation of why you think the pressure measurements the probe
> measures are directly proportional to drag when it is in only 40% of
> the "flow"?
>
> Why you didn't use little pitot tubes (instead of holes in a block) on
> the drag rake, as Althaus thinks is necessary?
>
>
> --
> !Replace DECIMAL.POINT in my e-mail address with just a . to reply
> directly
>
> Eric Greenwell
> Richland, WA (USA)

[303pilot]

You gotta spell things out for us slow kids in the back of the class. Is
the practical relevance that a 40:1 ship becomes a 40:.75? Are you moving
the polar curve, flattening it, both, other? Will it fit in a Christmas
stocking?

Brent

"Jim Hendrix" > wrote in message
.. .
> Well, here goes. I'll understand, or try to anyway, if my friends, who
used
> to think of me as a reasonable, level headed kind of guy, turn and run
when
> they see me coming down the street.
>
> Maybe it really didn't happen. Maybe it was only a dream. Maybe it was a
> calculation error or equipment failure. Maybe someone who really knows
how
> to test aircraft can see a flaw big enough to make it all go away. Maybe
> I'll just end up with egg on my face and that will be that.
>
> But I keep sitting here, looking at this graph, in disbelief. I built the
> drag rake, constructed and calibrated the pressure sensor, flew the test
> flights, crunched the numbers, plotted the graphs. I can't just write
this
> off as a kooky claim by someone I never heard of. You have that luxury,
not
> me.
>
> Sumon, Dr. Sinha, my long time friend and hydrodynamics professor at Ole
> Miss, told me a few months ago that he thought we could get 25% profile
drag
> reduction on my Standard Cirrus wing. "Yea, sure," I thought. "We,ll
see."
>
> He had already demonstrated 18% on an NLF0414F airfoil last year in
> Starkville, MS. And we easily got the same number at some airspeeds on
the
> first attempt with my glider which has a very different airfoil. "That
was
> about it," I thought. "We lucked into the sweet spot and we probably
can't
> do much better than that."
>
> Then, two days ago, last Saturday, October the 18th, Sumon thought he'd
try
> a little modification. I knew before landing that there was some
> improvement, about 0.12 volts on the pressure sensor at 100 kts and much
> smaller improvements at low speeds. (With this sensor, 1 volt is 1 inch
> water gauge pressure.) When I got home and processed the data, there it
was.
> We had essentially doubled the drag reduction we were seeing at speeds
over
> 70 kts and we exceeded 26% improvement at two points, one being the
highest
> tested speed, 100 kts. The average from 50 to 100 kts was 23.7%. We had
> also corrected a low speed roll off so that we now saw basically flat drag
> reductions, as a percentage of clean wing values, at all airspeeds from 40
> to 100 kts.
>
> Maybe it's a fluke, some huge error. Maybe we won't be able to repeat it
> and that will be that. Or, maybe it's real.
>
> For the full details you can take your browser to www.oxaero.com and click
> the Sinha Deturbulator and Test Results links.
>
> So there it is. Don't expect me to defend it. I'm happy to let time be
the
> judge.
>
> Fire away!
>
>

[Jim Hendrix]

I've already stuck my neck out and estimated the effect on a 15 m glider
like mine. You can read that at www.oxaero.com, near the bottom of the page
on Dr. Sinha. In about a week I hope to have a good baseline polar for my
ship, then we will apply a full span treatment, inner panels first, and see
what we get.
JEH

"303pilot" <brentUNDERSCOREsullivanATbmcDOTcom> wrote in message
...
> You gotta spell things out for us slow kids in the back of the class. Is
> the practical relevance that a 40:1 ship becomes a 40:.75? Are you moving
> the polar curve, flattening it, both, other? Will it fit in a Christmas
> stocking?
>
> Brent

[tango4]

How long will it last ( UV degredation, trailer rash etc )?

How's it fitted?

I sent a mail to the inventor of this system about a year ago and didn't
even get a response.

If you want to market the system you will have to spill the beans on price
etc!

Ian

[Jim Hendrix]

Ian,
Don't know about UV yet.
It is delicate and will require TLC.
It sticks on much like turbulator tape and gap seals.
Price will be geared to performance.
Jim

"tango4" > wrote in message
...
> How long will it last ( UV degredation, trailer rash etc )?
>
> How's it fitted?
>
> I sent a mail to the inventor of this system about a year ago and didn't
> even get a response.
>
> If you want to market the system you will have to spill the beans on price
> etc!
>
> Ian
>
>
>

[tango4]

Ahhhh

Nothing to do with the cost of production so much as what the market will
stand? I see that the US military have a vested interest in the patents
having supplied funding for the development. What percentage will they get
from sales?

Could be interesting. The US government may prohibit the sale of this item
to outside countries under some 'export of technology' legislation.

Ian

Man, the soaring season is a long way off!

"Jim Hendrix" > wrote in message
. ..
> Ian,
> Don't know about UV yet.
> It is delicate and will require TLC.
> It sticks on much like turbulator tape and gap seals.
> Price will be geared to performance.
> Jim
>
> "tango4" > wrote in message
> ...
> > How long will it last ( UV degredation, trailer rash etc )?
> >
> > How's it fitted?
> >
> > I sent a mail to the inventor of this system about a year ago and didn't
> > even get a response.
> >
> > If you want to market the system you will have to spill the beans on
price
> > etc!
> >
> > Ian
> >
> >
> >
>
>

[Tim]

"tango4" >s comments read:
>
>Man, the soaring season is a long way off!

A true statement there never was!

At the rate that u.r.a.s.b is going there won't be any sane pilots
left come spring ... quite funny though ;-)
--
Tim - ASW20CL "20"

[Andrew Warbrick]

At 06:54 22 October 2003, Tango4 wrote:
>Ahhhh
>
>Nothing to do with the cost of production so much as
>what the market will
>stand? I see that the US military have a vested interest
>in the patents
>having supplied funding for the development. What percentage
>will they get
>from sales?
>
>Could be interesting. The US government may prohibit
>the sale of this item
>to outside countries under some 'export of technology'
>legislation.
>

If that were the case, the FAI should ban it from international
competitions and world record claims.

[John Galloway]

Anyone got copies of Mr Sinha's papers or a website
where they are posted? I can't find anything on Google
and the details on the Aerox site are vague.

John Galloway

[Kirk Stant]

Andrew Warbrick > wrote in message >...

> If that were the case, the FAI should ban it from international
> competitions and world record claims.

Paranoia rears it's ugly head! Yep, those damn Yankees are going to
screw with the rest of the world again!

And anyway, why should it be banned? Especially in Open class? Aren't
records all about new technology, techniques, and locations?

Anyway, this is hardly a militarily significant invention, especially
if it is "delicate"!

Another 103+ cloudless day out here in Phoenix, hoping it will cool
down so we can do some decent soaring this weekend...

BTW, if any of you are in the Phoenix area Saturday, stop by Turf
Soaring and join us at the ASA's Octoberfest - lots of Brats (the kind
you eat) and Beers (the kind you drink). The worse the lift, the
earlier the keg gets tapped.

Kirk
66

[Kirk Stant]

Andrew Warbrick > wrote in message >...

> If that were the case, the FAI should ban it from international
> competitions and world record claims.

Paranoia rears it's ugly head! Yep, those damn Yankees are going to
screw with the rest of the world again!

And anyway, why should it be banned? Especially in Open class? Aren't
records all about new technology, techniques, and locations?

Anyway, this is hardly a militarily significant invention, especially
if it is "delicate"!

Another 103+ cloudless day out here in Phoenix, hoping it will cool
down so we can do some decent soaring this weekend...

BTW, if any of you are in the Phoenix area Saturday, stop by Turf
Soaring and join us at the ASA's Octoberfest - lots of Brats (the kind
you eat) and Beers (the kind you drink). The worse the lift, the
earlier the keg gets tapped.

Kirk
66

[tango4]

Try a patent search on the IBM Delphion patent site

http://www.delphion.com

Ian

"John Galloway" > wrote in
message ...
> Anyone got copies of Mr Sinha's papers or a website
> where they are posted? I can't find anything on Google
> and the details on the Aerox site are vague.
>
> John Galloway
>
>

[Martin Gregorie]

I wonder if there are any similarities between Dr Sinha's invention
and this:

http://www.winggrid.ch/ICAS_GROV.pdf

--
martin@ : Martin Gregorie
gregorie : Harlow, UK
demon :
co : Zappa fan & glider pilot
uk :

[Mike Borgelt]

On 22 Oct 2003 08:48:57 -0700, (Kirk Stant)
wrote:

>Andrew Warbrick > wrote in message >...
>
>> If that were the case, the FAI should ban it from international
>> competitions and world record claims.
>
>Paranoia rears it's ugly head! Yep, those damn Yankees are going to
>screw with the rest of the world again!
>
>And anyway, why should it be banned? Especially in Open class? Aren't
>records all about new technology, techniques, and locations?
>
>Anyway, this is hardly a militarily significant invention, especially
>if it is "delicate"!
>
>Another 103+ cloudless day out here in Phoenix, hoping it will cool
>down so we can do some decent soaring this weekend...
>
>BTW, if any of you are in the Phoenix area Saturday, stop by Turf
>Soaring and join us at the ASA's Octoberfest - lots of Brats (the kind
>you eat) and Beers (the kind you drink). The worse the lift, the
>earlier the keg gets tapped.
>
>Kirk
>66


My news server didn't pick up Andrew Warbrick's post.

But why ban any performance improvement? Even in Standard Class. We
didn't ban the LS4 with its new wing section even though it made all
the older ships obsolete.

Or was there some other reason for the proposed ban?

Mike Borgelt

[Ray Lovinggood]

Hmm, is this why we sand wings at 45 degree angle
to the leading edge?

Ray Lovinggood
Carrboro, North Carolina

At 20:54 22 October 2003, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>I wonder if there are any similarities between Dr Sinha's
>invention
>and this:
>
> http://www.winggrid.ch/ICAS_GROV.pdf
>
>--
>martin@ : Martin Gregorie
>gregorie : Harlow, UK
>demon :
>co : Zappa fan & glider pilot
>uk :
>
>

[Martin Gregorie]

On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 07:24:33 +1000, Mike Borgelt
> wrote:

>On 22 Oct 2003 08:48:57 -0700, (Kirk Stant)
>wrote:
>
>>Andrew Warbrick > wrote in message >...
>>
>>> If that were the case, the FAI should ban it from international
>>> competitions and world record claims.
>>
>>Paranoia rears it's ugly head! Yep, those damn Yankees are going to
>>screw with the rest of the world again!
>>
>>And anyway, why should it be banned? Especially in Open class? Aren't
>>records all about new technology, techniques, and locations?
>>
>>Anyway, this is hardly a militarily significant invention, especially
>>if it is "delicate"!
>>
>>Another 103+ cloudless day out here in Phoenix, hoping it will cool
>>down so we can do some decent soaring this weekend...
>>
>>BTW, if any of you are in the Phoenix area Saturday, stop by Turf
>>Soaring and join us at the ASA's Octoberfest - lots of Brats (the kind
>>you eat) and Beers (the kind you drink). The worse the lift, the
>>earlier the keg gets tapped.
>>
>>Kirk
>>66
>
>
>My news server didn't pick up Andrew Warbrick's post.
>
>But why ban any performance improvement? Even in Standard Class. We
>didn't ban the LS4 with its new wing section even though it made all
>the older ships obsolete.
>
>Or was there some other reason for the proposed ban?
>

His point was that apparently there's military money in the
development and so they might stop it being exported. In that case it
would be an unfair advantage because it would not be available to
anybody to buy.

Having glanced through the patent I think its an interesting idea, but
quite possibly too fragile to be practical on a glider. The outer
membrane is 6 micron plastic (mylar?) and that's almost too fragile
for outdoor use on a lightweight model.

--
martin@ : Martin Gregorie
gregorie : Harlow, UK
demon :
co : Zappa fan & glider pilot
uk :

[Andrew Warbrick]

At 21:18 22 October 2003, Mike Borgelt wrote:
>On 22 Oct 2003 08:48:57 -0700,
>(Kirk Stant)
>wrote:
>
>>Andrew Warbrick wrote in message news:...
>>
>>> If that were the case, the FAI should ban it from
>>>international
>>> competitions and world record claims.
>>
>>Paranoia rears it's ugly head! Yep, those damn Yankees
>>are going to
>>screw with the rest of the world again!
>>
>>And anyway, why should it be banned? Especially in
>>Open class? Aren't
>>records all about new technology, techniques, and locations?
>>
>>Anyway, this is hardly a militarily significant invention,
>>especially
>>if it is 'delicate'!
>>
>>Another 103+ cloudless day out here in Phoenix, hoping
>>it will cool
>>down so we can do some decent soaring this weekend...
>>
>>BTW, if any of you are in the Phoenix area Saturday,
>>stop by Turf
>>Soaring and join us at the ASA's Octoberfest - lots
>>of Brats (the kind
>>you eat) and Beers (the kind you drink). The worse
>>the lift, the
>>earlier the keg gets tapped.
>>
>>Kirk
>>66
>
>
>My news server didn't pick up Andrew Warbrick's post.
>
>But why ban any performance improvement? Even in Standard
>Class. We
>didn't ban the LS4 with its new wing section even though
>it made all
>the older ships obsolete.
>
>Or was there some other reason for the proposed ban?
>
>Mike Borgelt
>
I suggested that if it was restricted from export outside
the states it should be banned (and only for world
records and the wgc). After all, Rolladen Schneider
would sell an LS4 to anyone, even the Yanks.

This sort of performance increasing device is legal
in all classes except World class, you even get blown
wing turbulation in the standard class.

[Robert Ehrlich]

Andrew Warbrick wrote:
> ...
> ... After all, Rolladen Schneider
> would sell an LS4 to anyone, even the Yanks.
> ...

No more true since DG-Flugzeugbau has taken over LS and
has announced they are not going to continue the production
of the LS4.

[Martin Gregorie]

On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 13:22:54 +0100, Martin Gregorie
> wrote:

>His point was that apparently there's military money in the
>development and so they might stop it being exported. In that case it

"they" are the military finding source, of course, and presumably
worried about technology getting in the 'wrong' hands.

>would be an unfair advantage because it would not be available to
>anybody to buy.
>
That should say "everyone to buy". Sorry.


--
martin@ : Martin Gregorie
gregorie : Harlow, UK
demon :
co : Zappa fan & glider pilot
uk :

[Andrew Warbrick]

At 17:18 23 October 2003, Robert Ehrlich wrote:
>Andrew Warbrick wrote:
>> ...
>> ... After all, Rolladen Schneider
>> would sell an LS4 to anyone, even the Yanks.
>> ...
>
>No more true since DG-Flugzeugbau has taken over LS
>and
>has announced they are not going to continue the production
>of the LS4.
>

That's why I used the PAST tense, I'm well aware that
DG are only going to build LS8s and maybe LS10s.

It used to be true and was in response to Mike Borgelt's
comment that the LS4 wasn't banned when it made the
previous generation of standard class gliders obsolete
(20 odd years ago now).

[Robert Ehrlich]

Andrew Warbrick wrote:
> ...
> That's why I used the PAST tense ...
> ...

Sorry, I missed this subtle point, probably because
English is not my native language.

[Jim Hendrix]

Funding for Dr. Sinha's drag reduction research has been committed for 2004
by NASA/Langley Research Center. His proposal, Micro-Flexural Composite
Surface for Aircraft Drag Reduction, was submitted in response to NASA
Research Announcement NRA-03-LARC-02. This development will provide much
needed funding as Dr. Sinha works to bring this new technology to the
marketplace. See www.oxaero.com for more details.

Jim Hendrix