Soundwaves Boost Wing Lift

[[email protected]]

Here's some news that recently came out:

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7867

http://abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1439827.htm

Apparently, soundwaves can help airflow stay near the wing and increase
lift. This can help smaller aircraft to avoid stalling at lower
airspeeds. Is this a technology that could be usefully applied to
existing small aircraft? Or would it require some totally new design
thinking?

[Dave Kearton]

" > wrote in message
ups.com
| Here's some news that recently came out:
|
| http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7867
|
| http://abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1439827.htm
|
| Apparently, soundwaves can help airflow stay near the wing and
| increase lift. This can help smaller aircraft to avoid stalling at
| lower airspeeds. Is this a technology that could be usefully applied
| to existing small aircraft? Or would it require some totally new
| design thinking?



It would also require heavy metal music.



Well _somebody_ had to say it.


--

Cheers


Dave Kearton

[[email protected]]

I was thinking perhaps at least drones could benefit from this
technology, since they tend to be smaller and might have to travel at
lower speed to do ground surveillance.

Hmm, or what about at least toy RC hobby aircraft?

Comments?

[Charlie Springer]

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 16:31:43 -0700, wrote
(in article om>):

> Here's some news that recently came out:
>
> http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7867
>
> http://abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1439827.htm
>
> Apparently, soundwaves can help airflow stay near the wing and increase
> lift. This can help smaller aircraft to avoid stalling at lower
> airspeeds. Is this a technology that could be usefully applied to
> existing small aircraft? Or would it require some totally new design
> thinking?
>

I have some of the piezo polymer film they were probably using (from SONAR
experiments, and a steel plate target that tells you where the bullet hit).
The amplitudes would be very small, but covering a wing on an RV or Bonanza
would be less than five pounds in weight, including the high voltage
electrics needed for the piezoelectric material.

But New Scientist is not the most reputable source (called New Age Scientist
by some, ignored by the rest) and I would have to see this confirmed by
another lab. It smells a lot like the kind of signal that screws up your
instrumentation. The drive for the film is likely 800 to 1,200 volts and at
400 Hz running on a little model in a wind tunnel with sensitive detectors of
various sorts. I'll just say I'm skeptical.

-- Charlie Springer

[Smitty Two]

In article om>,
" > wrote:

> Here's some news that recently came out:
>
> http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7867
>
> http://abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1439827.htm
>
> Apparently, soundwaves can help airflow stay near the wing and increase
> lift. This can help smaller aircraft to avoid stalling at lower
> airspeeds. Is this a technology that could be usefully applied to
> existing small aircraft? Or would it require some totally new design
> thinking?

Here's a quote from the article in New Scientist (first reference above):

"In wind tunnel tests, Salmon stuck sections of plastic piezo-electric
film to wing segments. This film vibrates when an electrical signal is
applied, producing sound."

This sure sounds (no pun intended) like aftermarket stuff to me. It
might find its way into production eventually, but it sounds like you
could go stick some tweeters on your Cessna tomorrow and start landing
at 35 knots. That'd raise a few eyebrows among the line judges.

Of course, the best way to avoid stalls is to learn how to fly. No
technology in the world is going to render pilot error obsolete. OK,
I'll make one concession, for wind shear on final. It would be nice to
stay airborne when dropping through the bottom of a 20 knot headwind
layer.

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 20:05:57 -0700, Richard Riley >
wrote:

>On 20 Aug 2005 19:32:02 -0700, "
> wrote:
>
>:I was thinking perhaps at least drones could benefit from this
>:technology, since they tend to be smaller and might have to travel at
>:lower speed to do ground surveillance.
>:
>:Hmm, or what about at least toy RC hobby aircraft?
>
>He he he. It'd drive the people writing the requirements nuts.
>
>I just read an RFP for UAV's. One requirement was that it couldn't be
>detected by the human ear from directly below at 4000 AGL. But
>another was that it have all the necessary equipment to operate in the
>airspace. And THAT meant strobes and position lights. So when the
>bad guys can see strobes in the sky and can't hear it, they know for
>sure it's one of the drones.

The Stealth Fighter and the Stealth Bomber both have position lights, strobes,
and landing lights. This isn't to say they leave them on all the time....

Ron "Activate cloaking device" Wanttaja

[Jim Carriere]

Richard Riley wrote:
> In the airspace for this program, they had to leave them on all the
> time, along with their transponder - which had to have a mode that I'd
> never seen before, mode 3. This program wasn't for a battlefield, it

Um, serious question: are you being serious that you have never seen
Mode 3? You probably have, but by a different name. Mode 3 is your
plain vanilla 0000-7777 transponder (if it has altitude reporting
technically is is Mode 3/C).

Modes 1,2 and 4 are military systems (in the free world anyway). 1
and 2 are similar to 3, and 4 is also known as IFF (identify friend
or foe, although in function it is more like identify friend and
everyone else is a regular radar blip).

[[email protected]]

Well, could this technology be used to augment the performance of
canards? We know that aerobody designs that are optimized for
high-speed supersonic flight may unfortunately not be so efficient for
low-speed flight around takeoff and landing. Could this sonic lift
technology be used instead of canards, or maybe to boost the lift from
canards? Then maybe you could have smaller canards at least, although
I'm not sure liability canards pose to begin with. Also I don't know
what you'd do in the event of an unpowered landing.

I was also thinking about how stubby-winged re-entry vehicles like the
old X-15 or even the new SpaceshipOne might benefit from that 20%
increased lift.

What about using this technology for something more exotic, like a
martian aeroplane? With the thinner atmosphere producing less lift,
perhaps this sonic boost might make a crucial difference.

[Rich S.]

"Richard Riley" > wrote in message
...
>
> I can see it now, Threshold numbers - 140 kt dash speed, 16 hours
> endurance, 1500 AH available power, 300 lb payload, 500 watt surround
> sound system, 5g flash memory with Ozzy Ozborn's Greatest Hits.

Oh Lord, let it be so. Let Thy lift elevate that *&^%$ in the Mitsubishi,
with the 16" bass speaker, that drives by my house at 2 am, unto Thy bosom
and keep him forevermore. Selah.

Rich "Ever hopeful" S.

[[email protected]]

There is one other significant fact not mentioned. Turbulent drag,
basically a fluid flow is highly unstable. There is the classical
statement of the butterfly in Japan causing a hurricane in the Gulf.

This represents the control of chaos. Stalling represents the complete
breakdown of laminar flow. So it will not only improve stall
performance, it will (potentially) reduce fuel consumption. Turbulent
drag is caused by vorices in an unstable fluid flow. Fewer vortices =
more kilometers, fewer liters.

[Steve Hix]

In article >,
"Rich S." > wrote:

> "Richard Riley" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > I can see it now, Threshold numbers - 140 kt dash speed, 16 hours
> > endurance, 1500 AH available power, 300 lb payload, 500 watt surround
> > sound system, 5g flash memory with Ozzy Ozborn's Greatest Hits.
>
> Oh Lord, let it be so. Let Thy lift elevate that *&^%$ in the Mitsubishi,
> with the 16" bass speaker, that drives by my house at 2 am, unto Thy bosom
> and keep him forevermore. Selah.

Tempts one to put wheels on an acoustic homing torpedo, it does.

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
Steve Hix > wrote:

> In article >,
> "Rich S." > wrote:
>
> > "Richard Riley" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > I can see it now, Threshold numbers - 140 kt dash speed, 16 hours
> > > endurance, 1500 AH available power, 300 lb payload, 500 watt surround
> > > sound system, 5g flash memory with Ozzy Ozborn's Greatest Hits.
> >
> > Oh Lord, let it be so. Let Thy lift elevate that *&^%$ in the Mitsubishi,
> > with the 16" bass speaker, that drives by my house at 2 am, unto Thy bosom
> > and keep him forevermore. Selah.
>
> Tempts one to put wheels on an acoustic homing torpedo, it does.

"Push the button, Max!"

--
I don't have a lifestyle.
I have a lifeCSS.

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 23:34:20 GMT, Chad Irby > wrote:

>In article >,
> Steve Hix > wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> "Rich S." > wrote:
>>
>> > "Richard Riley" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> > >
>> > > I can see it now, Threshold numbers - 140 kt dash speed, 16 hours
>> > > endurance, 1500 AH available power, 300 lb payload, 500 watt surround
>> > > sound system, 5g flash memory with Ozzy Ozborn's Greatest Hits.
>> >
>> > Oh Lord, let it be so. Let Thy lift elevate that *&^%$ in the Mitsubishi,
>> > with the 16" bass speaker, that drives by my house at 2 am, unto Thy bosom
>> > and keep him forevermore. Selah.
>>
>> Tempts one to put wheels on an acoustic homing torpedo, it does.
>
>"Push the button, Max!"

"More brandy! Throw more brandy!"

Ron "The sloppiest tucker-inner in all Pottsdorf" Wanttaja

[Ernest Christley]

Charlie Springer wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 16:31:43 -0700, wrote
> (in article om>):
>
>
>>Here's some news that recently came out:
>>
>>http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7867
>>
>>http://abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1439827.htm
>>
>>Apparently, soundwaves can help airflow stay near the wing and increase
>>lift. This can help smaller aircraft to avoid stalling at lower
>>airspeeds. Is this a technology that could be usefully applied to
>>existing small aircraft? Or would it require some totally new design
>>thinking?
>>
>
>
> I have some of the piezo polymer film they were probably using (from SONAR
> experiments, and a steel plate target that tells you where the bullet hit).
> The amplitudes would be very small, but covering a wing on an RV or Bonanza
> would be less than five pounds in weight, including the high voltage
> electrics needed for the piezoelectric material.
>
> But New Scientist is not the most reputable source (called New Age Scientist
> by some, ignored by the rest) and I would have to see this confirmed by
> another lab. It smells a lot like the kind of signal that screws up your
> instrumentation. The drive for the film is likely 800 to 1,200 volts and at
> 400 Hz running on a little model in a wind tunnel with sensitive detectors of
> various sorts. I'll just say I'm skeptical.
>
> -- Charlie Springer
>

No need to be skeptical on this on Charlie. The technique will work.
Unfortunately, the five pounds of high-maintainence, active equipment
can be replaced with a few ounzes of turbulator strips.

I read one of the NASA reports, done YEARS ago, on the Larc website.
They used the same techique, using sound waves to re-energize the
boundary layer. Pointless was their conclusion if I remember correctly.


--
This is by far the hardest lesson about freedom. It goes against
instinct, and morality, to just sit back and watch people make
mistakes. We want to help them, which means control them and their
decisions, but in doing so we actually hurt them (and ourselves)."

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
Ernest Christley > wrote:

> Charlie Springer wrote:
> > On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 16:31:43 -0700, wrote
> > (in article om>):
> >
> >
> >>Here's some news that recently came out:
> >>
> >>http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7867
> >>
> >>http://abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1439827.htm
> >>
> >>Apparently, soundwaves can help airflow stay near the wing and increase
> >>lift. This can help smaller aircraft to avoid stalling at lower
> >>airspeeds. Is this a technology that could be usefully applied to
> >>existing small aircraft? Or would it require some totally new design
> >>thinking?
>
> > I'll just say I'm skeptical.
>
> No need to be skeptical on this on Charlie. The technique will work.
> Unfortunately, the five pounds of high-maintainence, active equipment
> can be replaced with a few ounzes of turbulator strips.
>
> I read one of the NASA reports, done YEARS ago, on the Larc website.
> They used the same techique, using sound waves to re-energize the
> boundary layer. Pointless was their conclusion if I remember correctly.

Kinda makes you wonder if they used a particular kind of "noisy" sound
wave, or simple shapes like sine waves.

It'd be really funny if it turned out to work with random or
less-patterned noise, and they missed it because they were too
organized...

--
I don't have a lifestyle.
I have a lifeCSS.

[Charlie Springer]

On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 19:22:47 -0700, Chad Irby wrote
(in article >):

> Kinda makes you wonder if they used a particular kind of "noisy" sound
> wave, or simple shapes like sine waves.
>
> It'd be really funny if it turned out to work with random or
> less-patterned noise, and they missed it because they were too
> organized...

One would be tempted to think this, but all noise (including triangle and
square waves) can be constructed from a sum of sines and cosines. It is
called Fourier's Theorem, and it works so well nearly all digital signal
processing is based on it to some extent. Note that the researcher's 400 Hz
signal (close to the A flat above middle C) could form some pretty irritating
beats with the engine/propeller. Concert A is 440 and I suspect anybody who
has worked with military aviation is familiar with the sound of the 400 Hz
power systems.

-- Charlie Springer

[Chad Irby]

In article .net>,
Charlie Springer > wrote:

> On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 19:22:47 -0700, Chad Irby wrote
> (in article >):
>
> > Kinda makes you wonder if they used a particular kind of "noisy" sound
> > wave, or simple shapes like sine waves.
> >
> > It'd be really funny if it turned out to work with random or
> > less-patterned noise, and they missed it because they were too
> > organized...
>
> One would be tempted to think this, but all noise (including triangle and
> square waves) can be constructed from a sum of sines and cosines.

Technically, yes, but there could be too many situations where "simple"
noise has nothing like the same effect "complex" noise does.

Considering that the airflow across the wings of small aircraft is
generally subsonic, simple versus complex waveforms could make a real
difference (for the generation or prevention of standing waves?).

--
I don't have a lifestyle.
I have a lifeCSS.

[[email protected]]

If you look at the theory you will see that it is counteracting the
effect of vortices. In fact the perceived noise fron the aircraft is
REDUCED. It is in fact antisound.

[Charlie Springer]

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 00:53:26 -0700, wrote
(in article . com>):

> If you look at the theory you will see that it is counteracting the
> effect of vortices. In fact the perceived noise fron the aircraft is
> REDUCED. It is in fact antisound.
>

As with sound canceling headphones, this would only work locally - as in
needing different cancelation waveforms for each side of the head. The film
would have to be a checkerboard of detectors and generators.

-- Charlie Springer

[Charlie Springer]

On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 22:55:17 -0700, Chad Irby wrote
(in article >):

>> One would be tempted to think this, but all noise (including triangle and
>> square waves) can be constructed from a sum of sines and cosines.
>
> Technically, yes, but there could be too many situations where "simple"
> noise has nothing like the same effect "complex" noise does.
>
> Considering that the airflow across the wings of small aircraft is
> generally subsonic, simple versus complex waveforms could make a real
> difference (for the generation or prevention of standing waves?).


Yet the researchers say they used 400 Hz sinusoidal signals and make no
mention of phase adjustments or feedback compensation to null out situations
that would cause detachment.

As for "technically, yes" I would say "and physically". Water waves are a
good example. The bow or stern wave from a boat is not a sinusoid. But there
is dispersion in water surface waves based on wavelength, so sinusoidal
components that can be added together to get the original shape, separate
over time till you see the longest waves leading and the shortest bringing up
the rear. You get a chance to see the "Fourier components" that make up the
original wave, and with no special equipment.

-- Charlie Springer

[Charlie Springer]

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 00:53:26 -0700, wrote
(in article . com>):


As with sound canceling headphones, this would only work locally - as in
needing different cancelation waveforms for each side of the head. The film
would have to be a checkerboard of detectors and generators.

-- Charlie Springer

[LCT Paintball]

> As with sound canceling headphones, this would only work locally - as in
> needing different cancelation waveforms for each side of the head. The
> film
> would have to be a checkerboard of detectors and generators.
>

This has been modified for your right ear.

[LCT Paintball]

> As with sound canceling headphones, this would only work locally - as in
> needing different cancelation waveforms for each side of the head. The
> film
> would have to be a checkerboard of detectors and generators.
>
> -- Charlie Springer

This has been modified for your left ear.

[[email protected]]

No reason why not a piezoelectric material will both tramsmit and
receive. In fact intelligent skin is very biological. It has evolved
independently many times. Dolphins and sharks have intelligent skin.
So, presumably, did Ichtheosaurs, although skin is not in the fossil
record.

[Charlie Springer]

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 03:15:40 -0700, wrote
(in article . com>):

> No reason why not a piezoelectric material will both tramsmit and
> receive. In fact intelligent skin is very biological. It has evolved
> independently many times. Dolphins and sharks have intelligent skin.
> So, presumably, did Ichtheosaurs, although skin is not in the fossil
> record.
>

Sport SONAR pucks work that way, but they can't send and receive at the same
time.

-- Charlie Springer

[[email protected]]

True. However we can divide our material up. There is clearly a lot of
room for research. To illustrate the potential benefits of research let
me make a biological statement. Water is 1000 times denser than air (at
2,000m altitude). Dolphins and sharks swim at up to 70km/h. Putting
ther same energy in in air would = 700km/hr. Just a bit slower than a
passenger jet.

The Dolphin/Shark at pek energy will probably rougly equal a modern
250cc motobike engine. This is typical of microlight propulsion.
700km/h - Think about it.

I also feel that aircraft of all types would benefit, not just
microlights although for reasons of cost they make the best
experimental machimes. An airliner would have a lower optimal operating
altitude as induced drag (caused by the fact that the plane has got to
impart 9.81M m/s momentum downwards to fly. Induced drag goes down
with air mass swept.

[Jim Rodgers]

Makes one wonder what the technique could do for prop performance. Any
thoughts?
" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Here's some news that recently came out:
>
> http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7867
>
> http://abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1439827.htm
>
> Apparently, soundwaves can help airflow stay near the wing and increase
> lift. This can help smaller aircraft to avoid stalling at lower
> airspeeds. Is this a technology that could be usefully applied to
> existing small aircraft? Or would it require some totally new design
> thinking?
>

[ORVAL FAIRAIRN]

In article >,
"Jim Rodgers" > wrote:

> Makes one wonder what the technique could do for prop performance. Any
> thoughts?
> " > wrote in message
> ups.com...
> > Here's some news that recently came out:
> >
> > http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7867
> >
> > http://abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1439827.htm
> >
> > Apparently, soundwaves can help airflow stay near the wing and increase
> > lift. This can help smaller aircraft to avoid stalling at lower
> > airspeeds. Is this a technology that could be usefully applied to
> > existing small aircraft? Or would it require some totally new design
> > thinking?
> >


It would be really difficult to mount the equipment inside a prop's
blades!

[niceguy]

Why not add a canard to all small A/C?

" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Here's some news that recently came out:
>
> http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7867
>
> http://abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1439827.htm
>
> Apparently, soundwaves can help airflow stay near the wing and increase
> lift. This can help smaller aircraft to avoid stalling at lower
> airspeeds. Is this a technology that could be usefully applied to
> existing small aircraft? Or would it require some totally new design
> thinking?
>

[[email protected]]

I don't see why not. Chips have been fired out of guns. Shells are now
intelligent. The chips would go into the hub and there would be a
printed circuit on the prop. No I don't see anything impossible.

[[email protected]]

Consider a propeller.
Transmission of vibration from the engine mechanicals and torque pulses
must produce tremendous vibrations in every propeller. These vibrations
must produce similar effects as these soundwaves. Maybe this is why
propeller blades seem to be able to tolerate higher angle of attack
before stalling than wings.