From: "Marvin Kaye" <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Thick vs Thin
To: flyrotary
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 22:07:04 -0500
Message-ID: <web-2093049@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <BAY3-DAV78PL83mxMAK00032cd6@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Posted for "Tracy Crook" <lors01@msn.com>:

Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Thick vs Thin

Don't know if if made it across cyber space but I did reply already.  It was
virtually the same as Bill Schertz's reply (above).  I agree with you that
there will be no laminar flow in a radiator but we simply disagree when it
comes to your statement about absorbing the same amount of heat but at a
slower velosity.  As soon as you reduce the velocity, you also reduce the
amount of turbulence.  As Bill and I have already said, turbulence is a key
factor in how effective the heat exchanger is.

You seem to think there is no middle ground between laminar flow and
turbulent flow.  Not true.  Many airplanes have non laminar-flow wings (mine
for instance) but that does not mean the airflow is completely turbulent.
Same story in a rad core except here, more turbulent is better.

Tracy Crook