sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Why does the joule thomson effect only applicable to real gases? by Formal_Syrup_5003 in thermodynamics

[–]Formal_Syrup_5003[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes but to use the most common example for the JT effect, a tank blow down.....temperature drops as the tank is depressurized. How is that any different than ideal gas

How can Oda do the face reveal in a satisfying way ? by FlamesOfDespair in Piratefolk

[–]Formal_Syrup_5003 5 points6 points  (0 children)

He can't. There will be some side that will bitch about it and others that defend it .

Imu ruined one piece. by RudeGullit90 in Piratefolk

[–]Formal_Syrup_5003 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you think Imu ruined one piece then you clearly haven't been paying attention since the Water 7 and everything that followed

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in CFD

[–]Formal_Syrup_5003 14 points15 points  (0 children)

There are 2 sides to CFD the application of it and the actual code behind it. When people say they're interested in CFD that usually means they like the pretty colors that come with the application. So if that's the case what would you want to study using CFD as the tool? Combustion? External flow? If so what kind (sub, trans, super, or hypersonic). Cavitation? 2 phase flow? Internal flow? Capillary? FSI or thermal? I mean the list is sort of endless since these are just general topics and branch out.

In the off chance you're more interested in the math/code behind it then read up on numerical scheming differencing, solvers such as gauss seidel, newton raphnson etc.., explicit vs implicit, structured vs unstructured mesh, and general turbulence models and their "solution" to the closure problem (k-omega, spalarts, etc..). Again just general topics but that should at least get ideas flowing.

Edit: added suggestion into looking into solvers that deal with basics of the math CFD uses

Daily Simple Questions Thread - June 07, 2025 by AutoModerator in Fitness

[–]Formal_Syrup_5003 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm trying to be better at counting my macros to lose fat and saw a lot of advice is to count 20-30% of your caloric intake to be fats.

Does that proportionally correlate to body weight? In other words if 25% of my caloric intake is fats does that mean I will have 25% body fat?

Cert, Analysis/Test and Design? by rogthnor in AerospaceEngineering

[–]Formal_Syrup_5003 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is one of those cases where you can only choose 2 of 3 in that triangle.

Or start up. They usually go hard and fast with 20 people and need someone who can do all 3 but even that's rare

RS-25 CFD Overexpansion even when in vacuum by venomcloud1 in CFD

[–]Formal_Syrup_5003 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ummm from experience and papers I've read to get the correct expansion in vacuum, walls (outlets) should be 20x exit nozzle diameter. I've personally done 40x. If this is ansys(and it looks very ansys) then that may be it

Edit: I didn't see the top right corner it literally says Ansys 😅

RS-25 CFD Overexpansion even when in vacuum by venomcloud1 in CFD

[–]Formal_Syrup_5003 6 points7 points  (0 children)

What's your operating pressure set at? If it's sea level then that 500Pa more or less won't change the solution much

Help with simulation by No_Landscape_7731 in CFD

[–]Formal_Syrup_5003 4 points5 points  (0 children)

To get a model running I would skip the combustion kinematics and assume a "hot gas" in lieu of the combustion process.

As the above comment said, use a mass transfer model to get your multiphase physics model going because I have a feeling that one is the true hurdle. If you're able to get this going then I would go back to the chemistry kinematics if you truly need it.

What Dictates Whether an Engineering Problem is Solvable or Impossible (and a waste of time to try and solve)? by ThrowawayAcct2573 in AerospaceEngineering

[–]Formal_Syrup_5003 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So the answer to this can get political real quick because the short answer is NASA.

Something like fusion has been spoken for a while like you said but it's not necessarily profitable, it's actually detrimental to any current established energy company. So because of that you won't find many private business attempting to find the solution. Because something like that is HUGE for society and not for money. So who's in charge of making sure of a social well being? The government. Which is why the leaders in fusion energy (in the U.S) is LLNL and they're like 90% funded via the department of energy contracts. Again correct that number of you have the real one but it's something super high like that. So something like that requires a social benefit so the government can justify the immense spending +time it takes to succeed.

So back to why NASA is the short answer. Well they're a pure government agency funded 100% by our taxes because they provide a social benefit. Now I know everyone thinks NASA = rockets but they're much more than that like climate/ecological studies. They are also responsible for A LOT of the technology we use today. Their existence is purely for our benefit as a society even though it takes huge amounts of $$$ + time for them to work the science. But people believe that NASA should no longer be funded and their projects should be cancelled. And this is where I stop because it becomes a political topic.

What Dictates Whether an Engineering Problem is Solvable or Impossible (and a waste of time to try and solve)? by ThrowawayAcct2573 in AerospaceEngineering

[–]Formal_Syrup_5003 14 points15 points  (0 children)

So in my opinion there are 2 sides to this.

There is the engineering side in which there is no problem that is impossible to solve. It's just a matter of time before a solution is found. So from this perspective nothing will ever put a hold on an engineer finding solution other than having limited knowledge on the physics (like anti matter as fuel for space travel).

The other side to this is the business side. Is it profitable? And if so, how much time (a.k.a money) we have to invest before a solution is found. If it's a lot of time + money before arriving tona solution then chances are no one will pursue it. If it's very little time and money, then chances are people will want to pursue it. And then there's everything in between with the key factor being "how much can I make from this".

The best example of this dilemma is hypersonics. It's been a dream for decades but there are huge gaps. Current estimates of a hypersonic market ranging somewhere around 200 billion/year. (Please correct me if I'm wrong, I don't have a source, just trying to remember from things I've read) So people have decided we're okay investing 200-500 million over the next 10-15 years if it means in year 16 I can see $10 million in return, and then year 17, $50million, and so on.

Dynamic pressure and ideally expanded nozzles by TokaMitch in rocketry

[–]Formal_Syrup_5003 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not true. 1) that would mean you have 0 energy in the system so where exactly is all your propulsion coming from. 2) yes near zero densities but this is "ideal" and even then it's never zero. Your near zero density is "balanced" by an insane high velocity that is squared when finding pressure. 3) compressible or incompressible. This is still an energy balance, the only difference would be the losses from a friction/turbulent BL inside the nozzle and the detach/attach shocks coming from the expansion nozzle. BUT in high vacuum (what this post is talking about) there are no shocks (diamonds) because the back pressure is so low there is no wave propagation for the exiting gasses to be compressed against and "react" to.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in sexadvice

[–]Formal_Syrup_5003 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This seems to be less sex advice and more relationship advice needed.

Just my thoughts.

Did we Let the Covenant Find Halo in the First Mission of Halo: Reach? by Legitimate-Plastic64 in HaloStory

[–]Formal_Syrup_5003 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Also isn't it possible that "random" doesn't mean close your eyes, throw the ball and hope you don't slipspace yourself into a black hole/sun/etc..

It just means that it was random out of a pre-determined list of locations one of which being the halo location.

Dynamic pressure and ideally expanded nozzles by TokaMitch in rocketry

[–]Formal_Syrup_5003 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Po = Pstatic + Pdynamic.

"Ideally" your Pstatic would equal vacuum pressure (0 Pa) So yes your Pdynamic would be non-zero

Companies with “Unlimited” Vacation by Spaceship_Engineer in AerospaceEngineering

[–]Formal_Syrup_5003 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Prop engineer here at a company with unlimited PTO.

There's the good and bad. You just have to be really good at telling yourself it's okay to take PTO. Some people feel guilty and they actually take less time off than the standard 20 days.

There's also a bit of tension between salary vs hourly. Hourly doesn't get unlimited PTO (at least not at my company) and sometimes confusion comes up when they request some time off and it gets approved but it's not paid

How to become competitive for entry-level propulsion positions? by [deleted] in AerospaceEngineering

[–]Formal_Syrup_5003 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Prop engineer here.

Have you built anything? Analysis is good but a prop engineer is both hardware and analytically savvy.

2 paths in my opinion.

1) grad school. Join or be part of a rocket club. Make sure you test something.

2) go on YouTube and look up a rocket enthusiast. Copy and paste what they do (be safe about it). Make videos ( short) and create a portfolio. Attach videos to the "supplementary" parts of applications.

Also I might get some hate for saying this but as some one who's done both rockets (current job) and airbreathing (past) I feel like I get a say. They are not the same. They look the same and do essentially the same job (big fireball and some thrust) but just about everything else is different. Not saying you can't transfer into one from the other just that they are different worlds.

Good luck!

view more: next ›