Author Topic: plane on a conveyor belt?  (Read 19903 times)

Offline 2bighorn

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2829
plane on a conveyor belt?
« Reply #495 on: January 27, 2007, 04:07:50 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by hitech
Some how I am missing your point here, In my view those 2 terms are 100% the same.
Rotational inertia is not velocity depended while  angular momentum is.

If we put it into layman terms, than rotational inertia equals initial force needed to start rotation and angular momentum equals kinetic energy of the wheel.

Offline eskimo2

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7207
      • hallbuzz.com
plane on a conveyor belt?
« Reply #496 on: January 27, 2007, 04:08:19 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by 2bighorn

Anyways, thrust has to overcome the rotational inertia.  

As already said, they all take off at the same speed and after same take-off distance.


You said the thrust has to overcome the rotational inertia…

But then you are saying the planes will take off in the same distance?

How does thrust “overcome” energy without consuming energy?

Offline hitech

  • Administrator
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12398
      • http://www.hitechcreations.com
plane on a conveyor belt?
« Reply #497 on: January 27, 2007, 04:25:43 PM »
2bighorn: Is this what you are saying?

Moment of inertia =  Rotational inertia
Angular momentum = Moment of inertia * RPM.

HiTech

Offline 2bighorn

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2829
plane on a conveyor belt?
« Reply #498 on: January 27, 2007, 04:27:55 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by eskimo2
You said the thrust has to overcome the rotational inertia…
But then you are saying the planes will take off in the same distance?
Eskimo, thrust has to overcome total inertia that is wheel inertia + plane inertia. Since both are depended on mass, if you just move the mass around from plane to the wheel or from wheel to the plane and the total sum doesn't change then necessary force to get plane in motion doesn't change either.

Quote
Originally posted by eskimo2
How does thrust “overcome” energy without consuming energy?
It doesn't.

Offline 2bighorn

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2829
plane on a conveyor belt?
« Reply #499 on: January 27, 2007, 04:29:13 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by hitech
2bighorn: Is this what you are saying?

Moment of inertia =  Rotational inertia
Angular momentum = Moment of inertia * RPM.

HiTech
Yes

Offline eskimo2

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7207
      • hallbuzz.com
plane on a conveyor belt?
« Reply #500 on: January 27, 2007, 04:34:16 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by 2bighorn
Eskimo, thrust has to overcome total inertia that is wheel inertia + plane inertia. Since both are depended on mass, if you just move the mass around from plane to the wheel or from wheel to the plane and the total sum doesn't change then necessary force to get plane in motion doesn't change either.
 


"When the brothers leave the air show they request a formation take off. They line up wing tip to wing tip and apply power at exactly the same time. All three planes weigh exactly the same and must hit 50 mph to lift off. When Chuck’s plane lifts off his wheels stop spinning instantly since they have no mass. Since they have no mass, they also have no rotational inertia. When Al’s plane lifts off his heavy wheels are spinning at 50 mph and have considerable rotational inertia. When Bob’s plane lifts off his half-weight wheels are spinning at 50 mph and have exactly half the rotational inertia as Al’s wheels.

Where did the rotational inertia and energy in Bob’s and Al’s wheels come from?"

Offline lukster

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2581
plane on a conveyor belt?
« Reply #501 on: January 27, 2007, 04:39:57 PM »
Any rotational inertia stored in the wheels is not countering the planes thrust. Spin the wheels to 100,000 RPM, instantly stop the belt and the plane will launch like a UFO (you probably don't want to do any banking for a while though). However, an accelerating belt is applying a force to the plane through the wheel. If the plane's thrust is great enough to overcome the frictional coefficient of the tire/belt contact the plane can move forward. The thrust of the plane, the frictional coefficent of the tire/belt, and the acceleration of the belt are variables, any two of which is capable of determining the outcome.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2007, 04:42:14 PM by lukster »

Offline hitech

  • Administrator
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12398
      • http://www.hitechcreations.com
plane on a conveyor belt?
« Reply #502 on: January 27, 2007, 04:40:11 PM »
Quote
Eskimo, thrust has to overcome total inertia that is wheel inertia + plane inertia. Since both are depended on mass, if you just move the mass around from plane to the wheel or from wheel to the plane and the total sum doesn't change then necessary force to get plane in motion doesn't change either.


This one had me for a sec, now I see what you are missing, you are not seeing the change in force between the surface of the wheel and the runway when the moment of inertia of the wheel changes.


lukster: Great opposit example that people should be able to see.

HiTech
« Last Edit: January 27, 2007, 04:43:56 PM by hitech »

Offline eskimo2

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7207
      • hallbuzz.com
plane on a conveyor belt?
« Reply #503 on: January 27, 2007, 04:43:38 PM »
I think I better post this every few pages as we pick up people who have not read the entire thread:

Here is a glimpse into how a treadmill pushes a wheel back as it accelerates.  Note the set-up:



The fire extinguisher is an anchor (overkill, I know) for the rubber band that is tied to a wire that is looped through the axel of the wheel.  To keep everything aligned, the wire goes through tubes that are taped to the green stool.  

The wheel is resting on the belt sander.  When the sander is turned on, the sander and the wheel gain RPM for less than ½ a second.  During this time, the wheel shoots to the right, stretching the rubber band.  When the sander and wheel stop accelerating and the RPM become constant, the wheel is no longer gaining significant energy from the belt and the rubber band pulls the wheel back to the left where it spins merrily in a steady state of energy.

The acceleration of the wheel stretched the rubber band in the direction of the treadmill (belt sander).  This is an example of how a treadmill of unlimited speed could load energy into a wheel of unlimited strength (and through a perfect bearing) through rotational acceleration.  Since the force is only applied to the bottom of the wheel where it contacts the treadmill, it is not balanced.  A vector of the force is applied to the axel in the same direction of the belt.  Note that it will not prevent the plane from moving if it only accelerates for ½ a second.  The acceleration (increase in RPM) must be constant, and must be massive.  

I hooked a crappy variable speed Dremel motor control to the sander.  I sort of got the 2 speed effect.  Both movies are available in AVI and QuickTime.  The QuickTime ones are in the original Nikon format and are a bit sharper and are easier to move frame by frame.

Watch the movie and imagine things on a much greater scale.

1/250th exposure wheel on sander:
http://hallbuzz.com/movies/wheel_on_sander_250th.AVI
http://hallbuzz.com/movies/wheel_on_sander_250th.MOV

1/250th exposure 2-speed wheel on sander:
http://hallbuzz.com/movies/wheel_on_sander_2_speed.AVI
http://hallbuzz.com/movies/wheel_on_sander_2_speed.MOV


Better movies:

Here is a paper treadmill; the source off acceleration is a falling shoe tied to the paper.  On the paper treadmill are a mouse ball, a copper pipe with a rubber band glued around it for traction, and an acrylic ball that may have skid/slip some.

Picture of the set up:


AVI:
http://hallbuzz.com/movies/paper_treadmill.AVI

QuickTime
http://hallbuzz.com/movies/paper_treadmill.MOV

Offline Golfer

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6314
plane on a conveyor belt?
« Reply #504 on: January 27, 2007, 04:56:03 PM »
The fog of this physics war has clouded everything and it makes me not want to click this thread anymore (for my sanity this is probably a good thing)

We need a table, chart or graph.  The question asks will the airplane fly.

It will fly people (clowns) to the left...

It won't fly people (jokers) to the right...

Will it fly?  Will it not fly?  Your opinion in a one word response.

Either "Yes" (it will fly)
or "No" (it won't fly)


-------------------------------------------------------




Yes

Offline lukster

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2581
plane on a conveyor belt?
« Reply #505 on: January 27, 2007, 04:57:53 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Golfer
The fog of this physics war has clouded everything and it makes me not want to click this thread anymore (for my sanity this is probably a good thing)

We need a table, chart or graph.  The question asks will the airplane fly.

It will fly people (clowns) to the left...

It won't fly people (jokers) to the right...

Will it fly?  Will it not fly?  Your opinion in a one word response.

Either "Yes" (it will fly)
or "No" (it won't fly)


-------------------------------------------------------




Yes


What kind of plane? Cessna 172? ME163?

Offline eskimo2

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7207
      • hallbuzz.com
plane on a conveyor belt?
« Reply #506 on: January 27, 2007, 05:04:54 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Golfer
The fog of this physics war has clouded everything and it makes me not want to click this thread anymore (for my sanity this is probably a good thing)

We need a table, chart or graph.  The question asks will the airplane fly.

It will fly people (clowns) to the left...

It won't fly people (jokers) to the right...

Will it fly?  Will it not fly?  Your opinion in a one word response.

Either "Yes" (it will fly)
or "No" (it won't fly)


-------------------------------------------------------




Yes


Conveyor matches the plane’s speed: plane will fly.

Conveyor matches the plane’s wheel speed: plane will NOT fly.

Now let’s find something else that most folks don’t understand and we can change physics and all kinds of things!  Majority rules after all.  

Heck, I can find a mob of people who believe that Austria is that place down under with all the kangaroos.

Offline Mini D

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6897
      • Fat Drunk Bastards
plane on a conveyor belt?
« Reply #507 on: January 27, 2007, 05:06:20 PM »
If an airplane were sitting on a conveyor belt and the conveyor belt instantly accelerated, the plane would barely move.

If you don't believe this, try pulling a table cloth out from below the place settings some time. That is completely acceleration dependent too and shows that you cannot add more acceleration to generate more force when friction is your only mode of transferring energy.

A plane would sit still and gradually start drifting backwards if a belt instantly accelerated below it... depending on how much friction could case the moment of the axle to drift backwards from perpendicular. The same is true of trying to keep the plane in one place with the engines running. You would have to be able to generate enough friction on the hub to move the plane's axle back to a perpendicular (straight down) moment.

No.

Offline eskimo2

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7207
      • hallbuzz.com
plane on a conveyor belt?
« Reply #508 on: January 27, 2007, 05:08:58 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Mini D
If an airplane were sitting on a conveyor belt and the conveyor belt instantly accelerated, the plane would barely move.

If you don't believe this, try pulling a table cloth out from below the place settings some time. That is completely acceleration dependent too and shows that you cannot add more acceleration to generate more force when friction is your only mode of transferring energy.

A plane would sit still and gradually start drifting backwards if a belt instantly accelerated below it... depending on how much friction could case the moment of the axle to drift backwards from perpendicular. The same is true of trying to keep the plane in one place with the engines running. You would have to be able to generate enough friction on the hub to move the plane's axle back to a perpendicular (straight down) moment.

No.


MiniD,

Answer the questions:

Here’s a story that illustrates my idea:  (Note that the term wheels in this story refers to wheels and tires)

Identical triplets Al, Bob and Chuck buy three identical bush planes.  Since they live in Alaska, all three brothers buy and install large balloon “tundra tires” and wheels.  The wheels, planes and brothers are identical.  All three planes will take off from a normal runway in exactly 100 feet and at exactly 50 mph.  The brothers fly their planes to an air show in Wisconsin.  At the air show Bob finds and buys a set of fantastic wheels.  These wheels are exactly like the wheels he has on his plane in every way except they have half the mass.  Their mass is distributed in the same proportion as the wheels that he plans on replacing.  Al thinks Bob is silly and is content with his old wheels.  Bob thinks that Al will eventually want a set, so he buys a second set to give to Al on their birthday.

Bob finds a buyer for his old heavy wheels and installs a set of his new lightweight ones.  He loads the second set into his plane so that it is balanced just as it was before.  Bob’s plane now weighs exactly the same as Al’s and Chuck’s, but its wheels have half the mass.

Meanwhile, Chuck runs into a magician who sells him a set of magic wheels.  These wheels are exactly like the wheels he has on his plane in every way except they have no mass.  Chuck installs his magic wheels.  He loads the second set into his plane so that it is balanced just as it was before.  Chuck’s plane now weighs exactly the same as Al’s and Bob’s, but its wheels have no mass.

When the brothers leave the air show they request a formation take off.  They line up wing tip to wing tip and apply power at exactly the same time.  All three planes weigh exactly the same and must hit 50 mph to lift off.  When Chuck’s plane lifts off his wheels stop spinning instantly since they have no mass.  Since they have no mass, they also have no rotational inertia.  When Al’s plane lifts off his heavy wheels are spinning at 50 mph and have considerable rotational inertia.  When Bob’s plane lifts off his half-weight wheels are spinning at 50 mph and have exactly half the rotational inertia as Al’s wheels.  

Where did the rotational inertia and energy in Bob’s and Al’s wheels come from?
How did the rotational inertia and energy now stored in Bob’s and Al’s wheels affect the take off distance of their planes?
We know that Al’s plane will still take off in exactly 100 feet; where will Bob’s and Chuck’s planes take off?

Offline WhiteHawk

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1815
plane on a conveyor belt?
« Reply #509 on: January 27, 2007, 05:15:21 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lukster
Any rotational inertia stored in the wheels is not countering the planes thrust. Spin the wheels to 100,000 RPM, instantly stop the belt and the plane will launch like a UFO (you probably don't want to do any banking for a while though). However, an accelerating belt is applying a force to the plane through the wheel. If the plane's thrust is great enough to overcome the frictional coefficient of the tire/belt contact the plane can move forward. The thrust of the plane, the frictional coefficent of the tire/belt, and the acceleration of the belt are variables, any two of which is capable of determining the outcome.


Sorry to have bowed out for a while, but husbandly duty called.  Lukster I agree with what you are saying.  Could you sum that up?  I read that as saying the plane is capable of flying under the right conditions?