Bloodhound velocity puzzle urgently needs best engineering minds

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

File: 1422547684421.jpg (256.71 KB, 1280x1714, 640:857, Bloodhound.jpg)

Bloodhound velocity puzzle urgently needs best engineering minds 01/29/15 (Thu) 16:08:04 No.1497

http://www.imeche.org/news/institution/bloodhound-urgently-needs-best-engineering-minds?hq_e=el&hq_m=686785&hq_l=4&hq_v=0420a9d527

>Ron Ayers MBE, Chief of Aerodynamics on Bloodhound SSC, needs Institution members’ expertise to help find the best solution to measure the velocity of the supersonic car.

>As Chief Aerodynamicist on Bloodhound SSC, Ron outlines some of the challenges of measuring velocity on the car. He is calling on engineers who have specialist knowledge in this field to put forward their suggestions to the team.

>“On most cars, determining the velocity of the vehicle is carried out simply by measuring the wheel rotation. At high velocities, this is not possible for Bloodhound. At velocities above about 600 mph the shockwaves and vibration fluidise the desert so there is no solid surface for the wheels to grip, and experience with Thrust SSC showed that they under-speed by some 5% to 10%.

Can you solve their problem?

01/29/15 (Thu) 16:17:53 No.1498

GPS

no need to thank me

01/29/15 (Thu) 16:20:25 No.1499

>>1498
>“Bloodhound is fitted with a GPS receiver. Although this clearly works well enough at road speeds, I am unclear whether possible lags in the system will introduce errors at 1000 mph. If such lags exist, can they be quantified and a correction applied? Will the fact that Bloodhound can accelerate at up to 2g, and decelerate at up to 3g, further complicate the matter?”

01/29/15 (Thu) 18:39:56 No.1501

>>1499
so they haven't even tested it, yet are looking for other alternatives.

bloodhound team a shit

01/29/15 (Thu) 20:08:21 No.1502

>>1501

Theory is cheap.

Testing is expensive.

Testing anything at 1000mph is also probably expensive.

I was going to say use accelerometer and integrate but

>For instance, we can integrate the output from a longitudinal accelerometer, but experience with Thrust SSC showed that small errors can accumulate so the results from this method are never better than approximate.

Fuck.

Broadcast a signal from the nose of the car, measure it at the rear. Ask Doppler what he thinks. Boom, you have a velocity.

01/30/15 (Fri) 03:21:06 No.1503

>>1502
>Broadcast a signal from the nose of the car, measure it at the rear. Ask Doppler what he thinks. Boom, you have a velocity.

Relativity, you dumbass. The transmitter is stationary relative to the receiver.

Put several receivers at known locations along the path, then you're talking.

01/30/15 (Fri) 03:54:15 No.1504

>>1503

But neither are stationary relative to earth, which is where their velocity counts.

01/30/15 (Fri) 08:00:02 No.1506

Why not just use a laser rangefinder retards.

This stinks of marketing ploy. Go fuck yourself op

01/30/15 (Fri) 11:56:30 No.1508

>>1506

Because they need to lock on and track the car at 1000mph (1 mile in 3.6 seconds). They could ask the military for some tracking equipment but they're probably not allowed.

Lasers have errors at 60mph at distances that aren't several miles away.

>unrelated
http://home.bt.com/lifestyle/motoring/motoring-features/spectacular-land-speed-record-test-pits-car-against-plane-at-650mph-11363957952871#article_video

02/01/15 (Sun) 04:57:50 No.1516

>>1502
>>1503
>>1504
I think doppler is the way to go. A broadcasting tower in-line with the run at either the start or end would do the job nicely. Broadcast a steady frequency and record what the car receives.

02/20/15 (Fri) 00:10:05 No.1741

>>1497

My name is on the fin of that thing I donated ages and ages ago.

02/20/15 (Fri) 01:42:59 No.1742

>>1516

Curvature of earth says no

05/03/15 (Sun) 09:41:18 No.2223

>>1742

What? How so?

I don't think the curvature of the earth would affect a doppler shift.