Re: "How Things Work" Website

[John Mallinckrodt <ajmallinckro@CSUPomona.Edu>]

On Sat, 29 Mar 1997, William Beaty wrote:

> But the author used the false "airstreams must join at the trailing edge" 
> argument.  I don't object to the "Bernoulli" viewpoint, but I do object to
> the incorrect reasons given for there being a faster flow above the wing.

I do not happen to be a particular fan of the Bernoulli-based explanation
for lift and much prefer transfer of momentum arguments.  On the other
hand, I thought the explanation provided at the "How Things Work" website
was rather good.  I'll go even farther out on a limb and say that I found
most of the explanations that I took the time to read well above average
for this type of endeavor.

I'm curious about why you call the "airstreams must join at the trailing
edge" argument "false."  In the steady state, laminar flow regime in which
the Bernoulli principle holds (and which is, admittedly, questionable for
airplane wings) mustn't this be the case?

John
----------------------------------------------------------------
  A. John Mallinckrodt      email:  mallinckrodt@csupomona.edu
  Professor of Physics      voice:  909-869-4054
  Cal Poly Pomona             fax:  909-869-5090
  Pomona, CA 91768         office:  Building 8, Room 223      
         web:  http://www.sci.csupomona.edu/~mallinckrodt/