[HN Gopher] Feynman Sprinkler [video]
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Feynman Sprinkler [video]
        
       Author : mhb
       Score  : 76 points
       Date   : 2024-01-13 22:32 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.youtube.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.youtube.com)
        
       | nadermx wrote:
       | That was damn cool. Reminds me of fluids in college. Difficult
       | course.
        
         | ShamelessC wrote:
         | Perhaps I'm missing something but it all felt sort of
         | underwhelming to me? I won't claim to have predicted the motion
         | of the thing prior to watching, but watching his demonstration
         | was not very surprising or counter intuitive.
         | 
         | What am I missing exactly? I'll admit I only made it about
         | halfway through the video...
        
       | samstave wrote:
       | Couple thoughts:
       | 
       | The jitter is likely due to the suction pulling the air from the
       | outside of the tubes, which then get pulled in the gap between
       | the things - which does so in a buffeting fashion due to the
       | movement of the pipes, so it finds the oscillation... (the tubes
       | are a Foil - so you have to accomodate the flow diff on the
       | external and internal of your receiving tube - and how the flows
       | from the outside of the foil are a diff speed/flow/rate than the
       | center of the tube - thus the light suction guy gets enough
       | strength for the outside air to push it back - once it gets far
       | enough from the horizontal tube, the pressure from the outside
       | flow drops and the lever goes back to its resting position and
       | begins again)
       | 
       | The other thing, as he mentioned eddys -- the inlet and outlet
       | cones should be turbine-spiral shapes - as the air/fluid comes
       | down the pipe, if you give it a spiraling/riffling it will keep
       | the flow somewhat cohesive as it spins it.
       | 
       | Further, as a YT comment mentioned - stuffing a bunch of small
       | straws in the main tube helps, because if you have a lot of
       | smaller tubes - (especially with water) you can get the effective
       | "orientation of the molocules" the same - so your stream can be
       | more cohesive (this method was (invented?employed) by Disney Land
       | Engineers when they were building the fountains that shoot clean,
       | cohesive lasers of water.
       | 
       | They run the streams to the fountain through pipes that have a
       | ton of staws inside - so the water gets orientated in such a way
       | that when the stream leaves the nozzle, the water stays together.
       | 
       | Also - you can test all this in FluidX3d:
       | https://github.com/ProjectPhysX/FluidX3D
       | 
       | --
       | 
       | The Eddy Pump was first invented by Leo Davinci... and now we
       | have great pumps like:
       | 
       | https://eddypump.com/pump-videos
       | 
       | --
       | 
       | The eddy is the most important thing to understand in fluid
       | dynamics IMO. (its what your Heart is, BTW)
       | 
       | ----
       | 
       | @Btrettel:
       | 
       | THANKS! I couldn't think of the term laminar...
       | 
       | And I was simplifying "stuffing straws"..
       | 
       | Appreciate the input. Have you tried FluidX3D?
        
         | btrettel wrote:
         | > stuffing a bunch of small straws in the main tube helps,
         | because if you have a lot of smaller tubes - (especially with
         | water) you can get the effective "orientation of the molocules"
         | the same - so your stream can be more cohesive
         | 
         | This is not the right way to think about it. The straws reduce
         | turbulence by preventing fluid motion in a radial direction,
         | and reduce swirl by preventing a swirling motion. (The screens
         | have similar effects.) Both turbulence and swirl prevent the
         | formation of a coherent liquid jet. The straws (and screens)
         | aren't without disadvantages as they will cause significant
         | pressure losses.
         | 
         | How I know: I did a PhD on the range of large fire-fighting
         | water jets and ended up reading a LOT of laminar fountain stuff
         | online out of curiosity.
         | 
         | > this method was (invented?employed) by Disney Land Engineers
         | when they were building the fountains that shoot clean,
         | cohesive lasers of water
         | 
         | Definitely employed. Flow straighteners (or flow conditioners,
         | or whatever you want to call them) were quite common for
         | turbulence and swirl reduction in general before laminar
         | fountains appeared. I recall seeing patents with flow
         | straighteners for fire-fighting purposes in the 1930s, and I'm
         | confident that they were in use in other areas earlier than
         | that.
         | 
         | ***
         | 
         | A side note: Laminar fountains are neat, but you'll find a ton
         | of misinformation about how they work online. I started writing
         | more, but Brandolini's law comes into play, and I don't have
         | the time to go into it.
        
         | dreamcompiler wrote:
         | > its what your Heart is, BTW
         | 
         | There are certainly eddy currents within the heart, but the
         | heart is not an eddy pump. As pumps go, the heart is most
         | similar to a reciprocating volumetric pump.
        
           | samstave wrote:
           | I should have said "Eddies are fundamental to how the heart
           | works" ;-)
        
         | btrettel wrote:
         | > Appreciate the input. Have you tried FluidX3D?
         | 
         | Glad to help.
         | 
         | I'm not familiar with FluidX3D. Lattice Boltzmann methods are
         | uncommon, probably because they are computationally expensive.
         | I'm a finite volume and finite difference guy myself. Finite
         | volume methods are the most common approach in computational
         | fluid dynamics.
        
           | samstave wrote:
           | Do you recall they showed the blip that the google folk made,
           | and it was in the hangar at Moffett field... they were
           | showing all the different motors and sensors - and it was
           | brought up that they had LIDAR sensors pointing at the
           | interior helium balloon... and someone asked why they would
           | be lidaring the thing...
           | 
           | I surmised that they were using it to calculate the internal
           | volume due to the deformation of the balloon as it loses
           | volume.... was I correct?
           | 
           | https://techcrunch.com/2023/11/08/the-worlds-largest-
           | aircraf...
        
             | btrettel wrote:
             | Sorry, blimps aren't my area of expertise. I don't know
             | what's going on there.
        
               | samstave wrote:
               | Its just a giant helium balloon inside the thing -
               | https://youtu.be/FrAc-yORdAo?t=170 - So its "finite" just
               | not small.
        
         | mhb wrote:
         | "After graduating from Stanford, Fuller worked as an Imagineer
         | for The Walt Disney Company, applying the laminar flow
         | technology he developed and refined to create Disney's
         | "Leapfrog" fountain feature at Epcot Center."
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_W._Fuller
        
       | snewman wrote:
       | I had a personal brush with Feynman with regards to this
       | experiment.
       | 
       | Circa 1986, I read _Surely You 're Joking, Mr. Feynman_ and
       | became mildly obsessed with the fact that Feynman doesn't present
       | the result of the sprinkler experiment (see the first few seconds
       | of the video for context). A number of colleagues (at the
       | software startup where I was working) and I tied ourselves up in
       | knots debating what the answer must be.
       | 
       | I wanted to perform the experiment, but lacking materials, skill,
       | and (frankly) ambition, I settled for a laughably primitive
       | apparatus involving a couple of bendy straws, the bathroom sink,
       | and my mouth. This was enough to reproduce the well-known fact
       | that if you push water out through the sprinkler, it will spin.
       | When I tried sucking water in, it would give a momentary
       | rotational jerk and then stop moving... but perhaps that was due
       | to my mouth tightening up on the straw?!?
       | 
       | After I shared this inconclusive result, one of my co-workers
       | decided to get to the bottom of the matter. He called the
       | Pasadena operator, asked for the home phone of a Mr. Richard
       | Feynman, and - to my utter horror - dialed the number.
       | 
       | It seemed impossible that this was a viable procedure for making
       | contact with a Nobel Prize-winning physicist, but through the
       | speakerphone, we could all hear a gruff voice that certainly
       | sounded like it might be him. All doubt was removed when my
       | friend explained that we were looking for the answer that isn't
       | presented in the book, and the gruff voice said, "Why should I
       | tell _you_? "
       | 
       | Feynman then asked whether we had tried the experiment, and to my
       | redoubled horror, the phone was handed to me. I stumbled through
       | some explanation of what I had tried and what result I had
       | observed. Fenyman then relented, and explained the entire
       | situation in ten short words:
       | 
       | "The sprinkler cannot rotate, because no angular momentum is
       | transferred."
       | 
       | (Not an exact quote, but something very much like that)
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-01-15 23:01 UTC)