Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover > Technical threads > FM/DM threads

FM/DM threads Everything about FM/DM in CoD

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-03-2012, 06:52 PM
TomcatViP TomcatViP is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,323
Default

Really did you read at least what I wrote on the last page?

(Edited on request).

Last edited by TomcatViP; 10-15-2012 at 09:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-16-2012, 06:06 PM
JtD JtD is offline
Il-2 enthusiast & Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 903
Default

Yes I did, assuming you are referring to this one. But it only states a few principles of aerodynamics, doesn't quantify them or provides a calculation illustrating that if this is taken into account, the numbers add up. I agree on the trend, but I doubt that they will account for the full difference.

Thank you for editing your post.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-17-2012, 07:51 PM
MiG-3U MiG-3U is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 55
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JtD View Post
Yes I did, assuming you are referring to this one. But it only states a few principles of aerodynamics, doesn't quantify them or provides a calculation illustrating that if this is taken into account, the numbers add up. I agree on the trend, but I doubt that they will account for the full difference.

Thank you for editing your post.
Well, the logical problem with Tomcat's argument on Holtzauge's calculation is that Mtt calculated that claimed 498km/h at sea level exactly same way as Holtzauge. So if we prove either of them seriously unaccurate, the other is just as unaccurate.

However, generally there is no steep rise on the Cd until mach numbers well over 0.6 so the error caused by compressibility is very small given the speed differerences around 15kmh talked here.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-18-2012, 06:45 PM
TomcatViP TomcatViP is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,323
Default

No Mig Sry but Mach nbr is the local mach, not the plane frwd speed.

At 15% thickness, the speed is in high subsonic when the plane is flying around 600kph.

At this local speed, drag effects are not linear and raise sharply.

Moreover, I think I was one of the first to put the dK/dt=SIGMA(P) eq around on forums. So don't nurse me with it. Thx in advance.

Remind simply that this give only the max speed any increase of pow will give to a plane. At high speed, this is not linear.

Generaly speeking:

Incompressible theo apply only for M<0.3
Btw M0.3 to 0.8 effecst are sharp and results vary btw 6% to 100%
Over 0.8, you hve shock waves and you need to apply according theo.

Of course many guys rely only on incompressible, simply because they never really to get into the others case

Last edited by TomcatViP; 10-18-2012 at 06:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-18-2012, 07:30 PM
CaptainDoggles's Avatar
CaptainDoggles CaptainDoggles is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,198
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomcatViP View Post
Of course many guys rely only on incompressible, simply because they never really to get into the others case
It's also much cheaper, computationally speaking, to use subsonic incompressible flow theory and then apply a linear compressiblity correction.

I imagine this is what IL2FB did, though I'd be surprised if their correction factor was at all realistic.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-18-2012, 09:30 PM
MiG-3U MiG-3U is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 55
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomcatViP View Post
No Mig Sry but Mach nbr is the local mach, not the plane frwd speed.

At 15% thickness, the speed is in high subsonic when the plane is flying around 600kph.

At this local speed, drag effects are not linear and raise sharply.

Moreover, I think I was one of the first to put the dK/dt=SIGMA(P) eq around on forums. So don't nurse me with it. Thx in advance.

Remind simply that this give only the max speed any increase of pow will give to a plane. At high speed, this is not linear.

Generaly speeking:

Incompressible theo apply only for M<0.3
Btw M0.3 to 0.8 effecst are sharp and results vary btw 6% to 100%
Over 0.8, you hve shock waves and you need to apply according theo.

Of course many guys rely only on incompressible, simply because they never really to get into the others case
Hoerner gives 10% rise on Cd at mach 0.55 in his analysis on the Bf 109G, steep rise starts around mach 0,6. We are talking here about 15kmh speed differences around mach 0.4 (460-500kmh at sea level) so we can safely assume that there is less than 2% difference in the Cd due to compressibility and that causes much less than 1kmh error in the calculation.

I don't think that anyone is relying on incompressible theory here, just giving a quick estimate of speed change due to power change at good enough accuracy. You can, of course, point out that compressibility is not accounted (nor Cl, prop efficiency etc.) but can you prove that there are significant errors?

BTW that calculation method has been criticized earlier in this thread, actually well before Holtzauge used it and you posted your stuff.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-19-2012, 04:48 PM
TomcatViP TomcatViP is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,323
Default

@Mig

Always the same, always bragging ... When did I post my "stuff" ? Tell me.

If you gonna be insulting be precise, accurate and honest..

Your Holtzauge did not post detailed calculation or discuss his method. I pointed one source of error. Tht's it.

This is the basis in Sciences. Put it down and submit to what ppl think.

ANd you just hve to open a NACA chart to see the drag rise for the specific airfoil. You don't hve to pick bit of info here and there. It's free and available.

But, huh, tht's what hurt the dark internet genius as always.

And by the way, 10% of drag raise (outsourced from my memory) is equal to what a fully open rad will do on Seversky P-35.

Tht's not negligeable my dear and will certainly not impact the max speed for only 1km/h

Boring...

@Doggle : you are right of course

Last edited by TomcatViP; 10-19-2012 at 04:54 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-19-2012, 07:34 PM
MiG-3U MiG-3U is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 55
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomcatViP View Post
@Mig

Always the same, always bragging ... When did I post my "stuff" ? Tell me.
Post #516

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomcatViP View Post
Your Holtzauge did not post detailed calculation or discuss his method. I pointed one source of error. Tht's it.
Exactly the same calculation is used on the Mtt test on the prototype V15a to calculate speed at higher power at sealevel (blatt 5) posted several times here. I used the same calculation for demonstration on the post #448 and noted that it's a crude, unaccurate and partially wrong way to calculate it. However, it's good enough for small differences.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomcatViP View Post
This is the basis in Sciences. Put it down and submit to what ppl think.
Yes, of course. But why do you complain about Holtzauge's calculation now but not about Mtt calculation which has been here much longer (or mine which was posted 3 weeks ago)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomcatViP View Post
ANd you just hve to open a NACA chart to see the drag rise for the specific airfoil. You don't hve to pick bit of info here and there. It's free and available.
Actually I'm refering tests of entire airframe, tunnel and flight tests. And yes, many are available. For Hoerner's Bf 109G analysis, get his Fluid Dynamics book. Some are freely available, here is one for few aircraft including Spitfire I. Below is also a Cd/mach number chart from that report attached, you can see that up to Mach 0.5-0,6 there is rather minimal drag rise due to compressibility.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomcatViP View Post
And by the way, 10% of drag raise (outsourced from my memory) is equal to what a fully open rad will do on Seversky P-35.
Hoerner's number 10% is for entire speed range from mach 0.3 up to 0.55 ie speed changes 250-300kmh while we are talking here about 15kmh speed difference around mach 0.4, that means that drag rise is certainly certainly less than 2%, probably less than 1%.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg spitdragvsmach.jpg (86.2 KB, 7 views)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.