The Perverted Science of Global Warming Gets Dirty(er)

Townhall.com ^ | January 20, 2014 | John Ransom

[FateAmenableToChange]

If operators believe they'll see significant savings from it, you can bet they'll do it. I notice the article doesn't mention how much drag is reduced, which tends to make me think the amount is trivial to the extreme.

Maybe drag is reduced in sterile saline solution, but the problem with any ocean going vessel is that the hull stays clean at a microscopic level for about a second or two after it's put in the water. After that, algae and plants would fill any microscopic dimples on the ship hull to the point that any improvement in efficiency would be as imaginary as models of global warming. At least that's my prediction, based upon all available data, estimates, models, and hockey sticks I have at my fingertips.

[CPO retired]

Golf ball dimples provide drag, and due to the back-spin there is more underneath than on top. Air flows faster over the top (less drag), and Bernoulli’s theorem shows that pressure goes down when air (or fluid) velocity goes up.

This pressure differential provides lift that keeps the ball in the air longer.

Jeweled (deliberately roughened) surfaces on metal can hold lubrication better, which DOES reduce friction.

[SgtHooper]

Reduced drag = sounds homophobic to me.

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

“Scientists have recently discovered that rough surfaces may actually reduce the amount of friction and drag after testing the hypothesis on the microscopic level.”

Anyone, who has ever used machinists’ gauge blocks, knows that very smooth metal sticks to other very smooth metal. The stickiness is at the molecular level, and it can be very difficult to separate two pieces of very smooth, flat metal.

[zeugma]

Maybe drag is reduced in sterile saline solution, but the problem with any ocean going vessel is that the hull stays clean at a microscopic level for about a second or two after it's put in the water. After that, algae and plants would fill any microscopic dimples on the ship hull to the point that any improvement in efficiency would be as imaginary as models of global warming. At least that's my prediction, based upon all available data, estimates, models, and hockey sticks I have at my fingertips.

True enough. I was thinking of it from a theoretical point of view. Having spent a summer scraping and repainting the bottom of a 38' sail boat way back in the dark ages, I'd have to agree with your assesment of the marine environment. I figure barnacles take about 30 seconds or so to appear even with the very expensive paint we had to use.

Oh, and how much freaking teak can you actually put on a boat? OMG.

[stylin19a]

great explanation

i was thinking more along the the baser lines of this(and yes I know the article talking about fluids)

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/10/22/mythbusters-golf-ball-like-dimpling-mpg/

[UCANSEE2]

The 'drag' on a hull comes from water 'sticking' to the surface.

Other things (barnacles and corrosion) add to it.

BUT , what if you had something the keeps anything from sticking to the surface , especially water ?

Well, it's already available. Think of what it would do to minimize the noise of PROPS on SUBMARINES and eliminate CAVITATION. Think of the added speed it would give to any kind of boat.

The product is called NEVERWET. Watch this video.

NeverWet Arrives - Hands-On Product Demonstration

NEVERWET WEBSITE

[FBD]

Bump