When the aeroplane a ([Fig. 28]) was placed in a horizontal position, and the apparatus carefully balanced, it showed at a wind velocity of 40 miles an hour, a lift of 1·56 lbs., and a drift of 0·08 lb.; at an angle of 1 in 20, a lift of 3·62 lbs. and a drift of 0·21 lb.; at an angle of 1 in 16, a lift of 4·09 lbs. with a drift of 0·26 lb.; at an angle of 1 in 14, a lift of 4·5 lbs. and a drift of 0·33 lb.; at an angle of 1 in 12, a lift of 5 lbs. and a drift of 0·43 lb.; at an angle of 1 in 10, a lift of 5·75 lbs. and a drift of 0·60 lb.; at an angle of 1 in 8, a lift of 6·75 lbs. and a drift of 0·86 lb. The blast was then increased to a velocity of 47·33 miles an hour, when it was found that the lift at an angle of 1 in 16 was 5 lbs. and the drift 0·33 lb. It will be observed that this aeroplane was only 8 inches wide, while the others were 12 inches or more. They were all rather more than 3 feet long, but the width of the blast to which they were subjected was exactly 3 feet, and they were placed as near to the end of the trunk as possible.
Fig. 29.—Resistance due to placing objects in close proximity to each other.
The next experiments were made with the view of ascertaining what effect would be produced when objects were placed near to each other (see [Fig. 29]). Two bars of wood 2 inches thick, and shaped as shown in the drawing, were placed on the machine and subjected to a blast of 41 miles per hour; the drift at various distances from center to center was as follows:—
| 24 | inches | centers, | drift | 6 | ozs. | |
| 22 | „ | „ | „ | 6 | „ | |
| 20 | „ | „ | „ | 6 | „ | |
| 18 | „ | „ | „ | 6 | 1⁄8 | „ |
| 16 | „ | „ | „ | 6 | 1⁄8 | „ |
| 14 | „ | „ | „ | 6 | 1⁄4 | „ |
| 12 | „ | „ | „ | 6 | 1⁄2 | „ |
| 10 | „ | „ | „ | 7 | „ | |
| 8 | „ | „ | „ | 7 | 3⁄4 | „ |
| 6 | „ | „ | „ | 8 | 1⁄2 | „ |
| 4 | „ | „ | „ | 9 | 1⁄4 | „ |
It will be seen by this that the various members constituting the frame of a flying machine should not be placed in close proximity to each other.
A bar of wood similar in shape to d ([Fig. 25]), but being 9 inches wide instead of 12 inches, was mounted in a wind blast of 41 miles an hour, with the front edge 3·31 inches above the rear edge, and this showed a lift of 7·08 lbs. and a drift of 3·23 lbs. When the angle was reduced to 2·31 inches, it gave a lift of 4·53 lbs. with a drift of 0·78 lb., and with the angle reduced to 1·31 inches, the lift was 3·37 lbs. and the drift 0·5 lb. It will, therefore, be seen that even objects rounded on both sides give a very fair lift, and in designing the framework of machines advantage should be taken of this knowledge. The bar of wood c ([Fig. 25]) was next experimented with. With the sharp edge to the wind, and with the front edge 2 inches higher than the rear edge, the lift was 2·54 lbs. and the drift 0·76 lb. By turning it about so that the wind struck the thick edge, the lift was 4·45 lbs. and the drift 0·47 lb. This seemed rather remarkable, but, as it actually occurred, I mention it for other people to speculate upon. It, however, indicates that we should take advantage of all these peculiarities of the air in constructing the framework of a machine, which in itself is extremely important, as I find that a very large percentage of the energy derived from the engines is consumed in forcing the framework through the air. It is quite true that a certain amount of this energy may be recovered by the screw, provided that the screw runs in the path occupied by the framework. Still, it is much better that the framework should be so constructed as to offer the least possible resistance to the air, and, as far as possible, all should be made to give a lifting effect.
Fig. 30.—Cross-section of condenser tube, made in the form of Philipps’ sustainers, in which c is the steam passage.