Efficient Airfoil Flight - Active Surface - TURCAN

Greatly Reducing Turbulence and Drag for Aircraft and Airfoils

Repetitive MetaStable Cancellation of Turbulence

  • All aircraft except gliders, have enormous turbulance losses during flight. Gliders are only excepted because they fly so slow that better airflow patterns exist, where less turbulence occurs, and that the effects of turbulence regarding energy goes as the second power of airspeed. So an airliner flying at 500 mph has around 400 times more aerodynamic energy losses than if the same size-and-shape glider was flying at 25 mph.
  • An Active Skin technology has been invented, TURCAN, where the vast majority of turbulence is eliminated. Theoretically, total aerodynamic drag might be reduced to 1/7 current drag factors, meaning that fuel would then last around 7 times as long or as far!
  • More practically, this new TURCAN technology should be able to reduce total aircraft drag to about half of current levels. This would DOUBLE fuel economy. Instead of an airline having to buy $120,000 of jet fuel for a specific trip, maybe only $60,000 would need to be bought! And then, with the gross airframe weight being 150,000 pounds less at takeoff (due to not needing to load those thousands of extra gallons of Jet Fuel) the overall efficiency would be even greater than that!
  • Below, reference is made to the US government spending millions of dollars to try to improve overall efficiency by 1.5%, several years ago. Interesting, since they never showed any interest in THIS TURCAN technology which would CERTAINLY improve efficiency by 50% and probably 100% or more!

This concept was invented and Engineered by summer 1998. This presentation was first placed on the Internet in November 2002.

Public Service
Self-Sufficiency - Many Suggestions

Environmental Subjects

Scientific Subjects

Advanced Physics

Social Subjects

Religious Subjects

Public Services Home Page

Main Menu
For the hundred years of powered flight, it has always been accepted that very large amounts of drag from air turbulence was unavoidable. This fact is closely related to the fact that virtually all aircraft are designed to use BOTH of two very different methods of creating Lift, called Bernoulli Lift and Reaction Lift, and the Reaction Lift is notoriously bad regarding creating massive turbulence and loss. There appears to be a method, TURCAN, to meta-stably eliminate most of that turbulence, and therefore most of the drag which must be overcome. The result would be extremely efficient flight, using far less than half as much aviation fuel to accomplish the same performance, and possibly less than one-fourth as much fuel consumption, without otherwise changing performance.

Powered aircraft must produce forward "thrust" to overcome rearward "drag" and then also be able to accelerate forward. The forward thrust also enables aerodynamic lift to occur, which balances the weight of the aircraft. Much of the drag that exists that is associated with airfoils (wings) is due to turbulence that develops along the top of airfoil and behind the airfoil surface. In many situations regarding Bernoulli Lift, around 6/7 of the total drag is due to this turbulence, with only 1/7 actually being unavoidable.

Until now, very sleek airfoil shapes and relatively thin wings have been the standard ways of trying to minimize this turbulence effect. However, these sleek shapes also necessarily have less Bernoulli lift effect, due to standard physics and aerodynamic reasons.

Another trend in modern aviation is due to the enormous power now available in aircraft engines. It is the reliance on a second manner of lift, "reaction lift". This type of lift is entirely due to the wing surface being tilted, so that oncoming air is deflected down by impact against the bottom of the wing. This is simple Newtonian action-and-reaction. Massive amounts of air is given a downward Momentum, which again according to Newton, necessarily creates an upward Momentum to the wing structures. Unfortunately, that type of lift creates even more drag due to massive turbulence behind and above the wing surface. With plenty of power available, that is not a problem, but it causes much more consumption of jet fuel.

Modern airliners use both methods of lift, with the majority of lift due to reaction lift, because that enables aircraft to carry greater payload weight, but at the cost of much less stability. Economics drives the world, and the ease of adding extremely heavy payloads, and therefore greater income, has generally kept up with moderately increasing fuel costs. That situation is changing, now that petroleum costs are greatly increasing, which means that aviation fuel is also much more expensive. Modern airlines rarely seem to make actual profits any more!

An entirely new and different approach is discussed here. I invented this system (TURCAN) in 1998, and did a series of small-scale fluid-flow tests to confirm that it works, and it does. It is based on enhancing the Bernoulli Lift process, with much less benefit regarding the Reaction Lift process, but where possibly larger wing areas might be used.

Find some book or some wind tunnel movies to carefully look at that turbulence that is above an airfoil. It is very well established that it is NOT random turbulence! (That's IMPORTANT!) It begins near the front above the upper surface of the airfoil, and it has a very periodic (but unpredictable) motion, a pattern, it is NOT random.

All Aerodynamicists use one specific book, "Theory of Wing Sections" (1949, McGraw Hill/Dover), as the central reference book regarding wing designs. (It says something that a 1949 book is still so dominant, but it indicates how little actual advance has occurred, except in supersonic flight, in the last 50 years!) Page 84 discusses laminar flow starting at the front of the wing, at low and moderate lift coefficients, as long as the wing surface is relatively smooth. At a minimum-pressure point, complicated effects occur where the flow generally changes to a turbulent flow. This commonly occurs less than 1/4 along the chord (width) of the wing, so turbulent flow is the predominant situation for most of the area of the wing. This results in a large amount of Aerodynamic Drag, meaning that a lot of extra fuel must get burned to fly.

From the reference system of the wing structure, air in front of the airfoil approaches the front (leading) edge, where the molecules are split apart into two separate flows, one above the airfoil and one below it. The upper path is the one on which we will concentrate here, although this same reasoning could be applied to the under surfaces of the airfoil as well.

The airflow therefore begins as what is called laminar flow, a very smooth and orderly motion of the air past the airfoil. At some distance along the width (chord) of the airfoil, small turbulences start to develop, in what is called a transition zone. Soon after, all laminar flow is gone, and the third stage of the airflow is called turbulent flow

In practical aircraft, laminar flow rarely continues beyond 1/4 of the wing chord, and well before the halfway point, fully turbulent flow exists. We will look carefully at each of the three phases in conventional airfoil design.:

It seems useful here to quote some portions of an article by Stephan Wilkinson in the AIRSPACE / Smithsonian Magazine from 1995.

Since the 1930s, we've been told by the popularizers of science that a technique called "laminar flow control" would enable airplanes to sip fuel and shrug off drag, slipping through the air like dolphins in a ship's bow wave. In the realm of large subsonic airliners--the mass transit of aviation--the attainment of practical laminar flow may well represent the final breakthrough to which pure aerodynamics can lead us.

With every experimental demonstration of the concept--and there have been many--we seem to reconfirm that, yup, this stuff works. If anything, the application of laminar flow control seems closer today than ever, which may be why it is the object of extensive NASA study, serious airframe-industry attention, constant university research, and considerable rivalry between the United States and Europe. It has been estimated that a 10 percent improvement in airliner performance would increase the winner's market share by $80 billion a year.

"Every molecule of air takes the path of least resistance," explains aerodynamicist John Roncz, designer of wings for such airplanes as the globe-circling Voyager (see "Wing Man," Dec. 1990/Jan. 1991). "Imagine you're an air molecule, sitting there floating along in space, and an airplane comes toward you. Unless you're pushed out of the way by the fuselage, you end up flowing either above or below the wing, and there's a single molecule of difference between those two paths. There's a traffic cop at the leading edge, called the stagnation point, and he decides who goes over the top of the wing and who goes under the bottom." The molecule that takes the low road, under the wing, need only go with the flow. High pressure helps to hold it against the airfoil as it slides aft, just like the air that presses against your palm when you stick your hand out the car window and angle it slightly to make a "wing."

But the little guy that the stagnation cop sends over the top of the wing has a harder job: there's low pressure up there trying to tear the air molecule away from the wing surface and set it to bouncing and burbling. A laminar flow air molecule travels like a surfer sliding smoothly down the crest of a wave, always an instant ahead of disaster. A turbulent molecule is a wiped-out dude plunging toward the beach ass over teakettle.

Ideally, the boundary layer is only an inch thick at most, and the effect dissipates quickly away from the wing's surface. But if you could somehow eliminate most of that nearby layer of air, say by sucking it away with a million tiny vacuum cleaners embedded in the upper wing, you'd eliminate a lot of the wing's turbulent flow. In fact, this is what engineers refer to as "active laminar flow control"--any system that deals with the turbulent layer on the wing's surface.

Turbulence creates drag. It'll also make lift, unless the turbulence gets so extreme the wing stalls. The airflow over an ordinary wing remains laminar for only the first 20 percent or so of chord (the distance from the wing's leading edge to its trailing edge). But the greater the turbulence, the greater the drag. And the greater the drag, the greater the amount of fuel that has to be burned to achieve a given speed. Or, to put it another way, the shorter the distance the airplane can fly on a given amount of fuel. Get rid of that drag and the airplane will fly either farther or faster--or it can be built with a smaller, lighter wing and do both.

Figuring that natural laminar flow produced entirely by the shape and smoothness of the wing was a hopeless phantasm, the British initiated the first active laminar flow control project. In 1955 three de Havilland Vampire jet fighters were fitted with several kinds of porous wing surfaces through which the turbulent air closest to the wing was vacuumed away to create laminar flow. NASA was at the same time trying a similar strategy on a Lockheed F-94 interceptor, another straight-wing jet.

Both tests worked, after a fashion, but the airplanes were encumbered with complex extra systems, requiring considerable power to run the suction pumps. The tiny holes in the Vampires' wings--which actually weren't all that tiny--set up their own airflow disturbances and weakened the wing skin enough to cause it to deform in flight.

In 1966, Northrop and the U.S. Air Force built two of the largest X-planes ever flown: the X-21As. The experimental twin-jets started life as weather-reconaissance Douglas WB-66 jets, electronic warfare versions of which saw service over Vietnam. Under a distinctive humped back, each X-21 sported a swept laminar flow control wing lined with thousands of spanwise razor-thin slits that were in turn perforated with over 815,000 minuscule holes, each of which sucked away turbulent air into a vast internal network of nearly 68,000 ducts, all leading to a pair of high-pressure pumps under the wings. The B-66's main engines were moved from their under-wing pylons to aft shoulder mounts like those on a typical business jet.

The X-21s were meant to prove not only that active laminar flow was achievable but that such a system could be manufactured, maintained, and operated in an everyday environment. "The X-21As proved conclusively that [laminar flow control] is both effective and viable," experimental-aircraft authority Jay Miller writes in his book The X-Planes. "However, they also demonstrated that LFC incurred certain maintenance penalties that were not easily overcome [and] that production technology for manufacturing LFC surfaces and related components was prohibitively expensive for all but experimental aircraft."

The X-21A program had demonstrated that active laminar flow could be achieved using a hand-built wing that required constant maintenance--much of it devoted to keeping the pinholes from clogging with dust, dirt, and bugs--and enough power on board to run the hungry pumps. Active laminar flow control seemed to be a laboratory oddity with no hope of practical application. Unfortunately, that may be nearly as true today as it was in 1966.

The size and shape of the pinholes--and tuning the exact amount of suction applied through them--are the keys to the success or failure of any active laminar flow control system. In the 1940s and '50s, the trick was drilling the holes small enough or finding a porous wing material strong enough. In the '60s and '70s, the holes got smaller and more precise, but the problem became one of keeping them from clogging with dust and dirt.

Originally published in Air & Space/Smithsonian Magazine, JUN/JUL 1995. Copyright 1995, Smithsonian Institution. All rights reserved.

Laminar Flow

When the differential velocity is slow enough, all fluid flow starts out as laminar flow. The Physics description of laminar flow is that a very thin layer of the fluid against the airfoil does not move along the airfoil; and a second thin layer just outside of that layer slowly slides across the first layer (WITHOUT ANY MIXING) as though they were large sheets of slippery plastic sheeting, or the way a brand new deck of oiled playing cards allows each layer to freely slip along the next. In laminar flow, the top such layer is described as being the outer edge of a boundary layer which is the term that describes the entire stack.

In considering the new deck of cards example, one can see why laminar flow allows extremely easy and free passage of the fluid (air) to go past with extremely low friction (drag). A chart on page 100 of the book referenced above shows that the Skin Friction Coefficient for Laminar Flow, at speeds that conventional airliners fly at, is around 1/7 as great as the same coefficient for Turbulent Flow.

There are some characteristics of air which affect just how smoothly the air can go by an airfoil, particularly the density of the air and the dynamic viscosity of the air. The (relative) velocity of the air is also very important, as is the length of time (distance) that the air is moving along that boundary layer. There is a defined number, called the Reynold's number which is generally used in calculations. If we consider an airliner wing at 30,000 feet altitude, the temperature is very cold and the air pressure is rather low, and the density and dynamic viscosity are both well known, the Reynold's number is given by:
Re = 4100 * V(mph) * L(feet).

For an airliner flying at 500 mph, by the time that the air has gone (L = 1) one foot along the airfoil surface, the Reynold's number is already 4100 * 500 * 1 or around 2,000,000. A key usefulness of the Reynold's number is in determining whether laminar or turbulent flow exists. A common guideline is that if the Reynold's number is above about 500,000, laminar flow ceases. Therefore, we would be considering a situation where laminar flow had already disappeared and fully turbulent flow was acting. This situation would then apply for the remaining 12 feet of wing width, where fully turbulent flow exists.

On page 105 of that book, "For viscous flows at very low Reynold's numbers, as in oil, all disturbances are damped out by the dynamic fluid viscosity, and the flow is laminar regardless of the magnitude of any disturbance. As the Reynold's number is increased, a condition is reached at which some particular types of disturbances are amplified and eventually cause transition [into turbulent flow]. Further increase of the Reynold's number causes amplification to occur for a greater variety of disturbances and increases the rate of amplification."

Lower on that same page, there is a discussion regarding the amplification factor of disturbances (turbulences) of various frequencies. References to assorted theoretical and experimental research efforts regarding various frequencies are cited there. The specific point here is that there ARE distinct frequencies involved. An extensive section, from page 143 through 182, discusses "Effect of Surface Condition on Lift Characteristics". This section primarily identifies three primary sources of disturbances: (a) surface irregularities; (b) surface waviness; and (c) engine or aircraft vibration.

Regarding surface irregularities, page 157 mentions that dust particles on the wing surface, near the leading edge, tend to cause the transition from laminar to turbulent flow to occur. The frequency of such disturbances tend to depend on the relative airspeed and certain dimensions of the dust object and the wing. A reference is made that dust particles which adhere to the oil from human fingerprints may be expected to cause transition to turbulent flow! Extensive discussion is about polishing and waxing the wing surfaces and various types of paint finishes, to minimize aerodynamic drag. However, the general conclusion reached is that wings that are in actual situations will have dust, ice, insects, and possibly battle damage, and that attempts to provide super smooth surfaces might not be practical, because of the amazing sensitivity regarding really tiny particles initiating the onset of turbulence.

Regarding surface waviness, page 164 mentions that standard construction techniques cause more difficulty in limiting chord-wise surface waviness than in maintaining the required surface smoothness. The specific point here is that surface waviness always has a characteristic length, and between that length and the airspeed, a specific frequency of created turbulence would develop from such surface defects.

Page 173 begins the discussion of airframe and motor vibrations. Again, the only important concern here is that such vibrations have natural frequencies, which depend on structural characteristics of the airframe and the engines.

The result of this is that all of the three sources of turbulence have initial natural frequencies at which the turbulence begins. It is certainly true that very quickly, combinations and harmonics get amplified, and there is soon a very complex combination of such frequencies acting, but near the very onset of turbulence, there are relatively fewer.

In 1998, I invented a system, TURCAN, in either of two configurations, which rapidly identifies the frequencies and amplitudes and even the waveform shapes of the early turbulence, and then uses a long-proven principle of Physics called destructive interference, to entirely cancel it out. Actually, about the same time I invented my approach, others started working on a somewhat different variant based on the same concept, which is now generally referred to as MEMS. Their approach involves microscopic active devices and processes, which results in extremely delicate equipment! Their approach seems to have virtually no realistic usefulness, due to real-life complications of things like dust and rain and insects.

In either my TURCAN approach or the MEMS approach, the net effect will be as though there had been essentially no incipient turbulence in the first place! This then has the effect of shifting the transition from laminar to turbulent flow rearward along the airfoil surface. In my system, repeated identical Modules behind them sense any remaining or newer incipient turbulence and repeatedly cancels it out. If the entire airfoil surface is covered with such Modules, then ANY turbulences, from any source causes, would always be promptly cancelled out. The result would be a nearly laminar flow along the entire chord of the airfoil. The effect cannot be perfect, because additional small turbulences constantly keep beginning and evolving during processing, so pure laminar flow would probably not occur. However, those new small turbulences would then be cancelled out by the next Module rearward. Large-scale turbulence is therefore impossible with this system.

In July 1998, I built some fluid-flow test apparatus and I confirmed that virtually all turbulent flow was eliminated and nearly only laminar flow was present.

Considering that a modern wing has so much turbulence as to cause around seven times the amount of aerodynamic drag than a purely laminar flow would cause, this improvement could theoretically reduce aerodynamic drag by 86%, down to 1/7 of what is now considered unavoidable. That situation would result in a fuel consumption of around 1/7 as much as occurs today. That theoretical possibility is unrealistic, I think, but if this TURCAN (TURbulence CANcellation) system can reduce fuel consumption by even half, 50%, enormous economic benefits would result.

MyTURCAN invention involves only technologies which currently exist! They are combined in ways which have not previously been done, to enable this new capability. It has become well established that real-time corrections can be made at least 10,000 times per second, by relatively standard conventional equipment. In the case of an aircraft which is traveling at 500 mph or 800 feet per second, the relative air speed is just one inch in 0.0001 second, which suggests that suitable corrections and wave cancellations can be made before any turbulences become mutated very much.

As I am a Theoretical Physicist and not in the Aeronautical industry, I do not happen to have access to a wind tunnel to test any prototypes! Therefore, my progress regarding developing this invention is somewhat stalled!

In early 2003, after initiating US Patent procedures, some contacts were made with individuals at Boeing, McDonald-Douglass and other aircraft designers (who each have their own wind tunnels!) In each case, I was told that they employed the world's most brilliant Engineers and Designers and if any idea was worthwhile, THEY would have thought of it! Interesting! (They haven't!) I have some really sad (and funny) e-mails from several of those "hot-shot" Engineers who, without actually understanding the concept at all, felt the need to try to humiliate me in an assortment of ways. Fortunately, having gotten my College Degree from the University of Chicago in Theoretical Nuclear Physics, I am not usually intimidated by the pseudo-intellect of people who believe they know it all! Particularly when they make it clear that they didn't even bother to examine what it is that they are criticizing!

After assorted frustrating communications like that, it seemed clear that I was expected to "jump through hoops" for them, to somehow "earn" their valuable time. That's not going to happen! In Physics, an Hypothesis must be very well researched in order to have any potential merit; I believe I have already done that with this TURCAN concept. The kindest, and the ONLY civil response I received was from a lower-ranked Engineer who informed me that I should develop the technology, build a substantial-sized prototype and wind tunnel test it, and THEN they MIGHT consider looking at it! So, apparently, rather than even bothering to read the descriptions that I sent to them, they expected me to personally spend maybe $1,000,000 or more first? Well, that's not going to happen either!

It seems to me that they should have been VERY interested in "wasting" at least a few minutes with me! The US Government is currently (2003) financing some extensive research which HOPES to reduce aerodynamic drag by 3% but actually expects the benefit to be around 1.5% improvement. That research is taking many years and many millions of dollars. I am proposing a far simpler and more reliable system which, if it only performs TWENTY TIMES that well (30% reduction of aerodynamic drag), I will consider it somewhat of a disappointment! And the technology is already well developed and seems capable of being incorporated into both existing and new aircraft within a year.

Wouldn't it seem worth wasting a few minutes of someone's time to patiently listen about such a possibility? After all, if an aircraft manufacturer was able to offer a design that had such tremendous improvements regarding fuel consumption (the largest individual expense of all airlines), wouldn't it seem that that manufacturer would then sell new aircraft to replace nearly every airliner in the world? But, I guess, as a mere Physicist, I couldn't know such things!

No, I will NOT fill out endless paperwork in order to qualify to apply for permission to present such an invention, either to an aircraft manufacturer or government agencies. So, it may be a long time that airlines each spend millions of extra dollars every day for Jet fuel. If some airline executive some day sees this and sees value in potentially saving a few billion dollars every year for his company, maybe some progress can happen. Otherwise, I have tried my best to enable that savings to happen. I have also tried my best to enable American aircraft manufacturers to sell a LOT of new aircraft. I find all this both peculiar and interesting!

I do NOT give authorization or permission to ANYONE to manufacture or sell any of my TURCAN Modules, nor to install them in any aircraft or other airfoils, without a WRITTEN CONTRACT with my Signature on it!

This Turcan concept is entirely based on existing technologies. It is essentially simply an example of a standard Physics principle of "destructive interference of wave phenomena" where any wave motion or phenomenon can be "nulled out" by introducing an identical wave motion that is exactly out of phase with it. The net result is no wave motion remaining at all. The actual device is somewhat more complex than that, of course! It is also quite unique from the MEMS approach, and far more durable.

Functioning and Description of TURCAN

Imagine a "Module" which is exactly 6" square, and which will replace an identical sized area of the top surface of the airfoil near the leading edge of an airfoil. Near the leading edge of this Module, I have a 5"x1" area, and two inches farther rear, I have a 5"x2" area.

Turbulence is still very minimal so close to the leading edge of the airfoil. Turbulence is actually primarily a Z-axis motion of air molecules. Therefore, my 5"x1" forward area is actually an "audio microphone" embedded in the Module. This then senses even microscopic incipient turbulence. It detects air motions at any FREQUENCY and AMPLITUDE and WAVEFORM SHAPE. The electrical signal from this audio microphone goes to a fairly conventional amplifier, and then to an Inverter, and then it is electronically amplified as described below. It is then sent to a "voice coil" (like in an audio speaker) which is mounted to the underside of the slightly flexible membrane on the 5"x2" area.

The Module needs to monitor Airspeed. For this discussion, we will say that an airliner is cruising at 800 feet/second. The specific air moleculles that we detected as moving in the "microphone sensor" now passes rearward 3" to get to be above the "speaker membrane", which takes 1/3200 second (due to that airspeed). So my electronics includes a DELAY of 1/3200 second in that signal path described above.

Now, IF the detected turbulence "had not changed" during that 1/3200 second, and the electronics amplifier had a Gain of 1.000 then the 5"x2" membrane will vibrate exactly once and exactly at the right moment to counteract that exact initial turbulence. THAT would totally null the turbulence out!

Unfortunately, even in just 1/3200 second, that reasoning is not strictly true. The FREQUENCY of the turbulence does not significantly change, and neither does the WAVEFORM shape. But the AMPLITUDE of the turbulence tends to INCREASE.

Therefore, the Gain would be set at 1.5000 This would supply a "larger" vibration of the speaker membrane than the actual air movement which the microphone sensor had detected. That setting, the electronic Gain of the amplifier would be set and possibly adjusted. It can be different depending on how clean or dirty the airfoil surface is, whether it is humid or raining, etc.

In any case, the BULK of the incipient turbulence had gotten "cancelled out" by the time the air got past that 6" of airfoil surface.

Now, there is a SECOND Module, diectly behind this one. It WILL detect some (remaining) turbulence, but far smaller Amplitude due to the bulk of it having been nulled out. But the WAVEFORM may now be pretty complex. Fine! THIS Microphone Sensor would detect all of whatever turbulence is left, including all the Frequencies and Amplitudes involved. The second Module is IDENTICAL to the description of the first, above. So that second electrical signal gets amplified, inverted, and sent to its own speaker Membrane. Even though both are much more complex now, they both have rather small Amplitudes! And the speaker membrane (Z-axis) motion nulls out nearly all of the remaining turbulence.

This continues, across the entire breadth of the airfoil such that the ambient airflow passes over maybe 40 sequential Modules in getting past the 20-foot-wide airfoil wing. Each Module senses whatever Amplitude and Frequency and waveform complexity exists locally, and then supplies an Inverted nulling motion of the 5"x2" Membrane to null out (nearly) all remaining turbulence.

Rather than the current technology of generation of massive turbulence around 1/4 of the way past every airfoil, very little turbulence can ever arise with the TURCAN system!

There IS a more complex and more expensive version of this. In the Electronics, a Fourier Analysis is made of every detected turbulence signal. Fourier separates ANY complex waveform into a finite number of separate (simple) SINEWAVE motions. All these motions are amplified and inverted and then electronically re-combined and they collectively drive the voice coil of the speaker Membrane. THIS approach can reduce turbulence even more effectively. I generally do NOT think the expense of this added sophistication is necessary for any current aircraft.

Modern airliners MUST have their airfoil surfaces WASHED very regularly, to minimize turbulence. Even a fingerprint on a leading edge can produce massive turbulence. But with my TURCAN, I am pretty sure that my Modules can process even signals from very dirty wings! (Nobody else can do that!)

One other detail. The many thousands of TURCAN Modules are VIRTUALLY identical, but not quite. They must each have a microscopic convex curvature to comply with the curvature of that specific area of the airfoil shape.

Modules on the fuselage near windows and other structures may need additional design sophistication.

This presentation was first placed on the Internet in November 2002. It was actually invented in the summer of 1998. It was experimentally tested on a small scale in July 1998.

Aircraft-Related presentations in this Domain

Aerodynamic Lift - How Airplanes Fly. The Physics of Aeronautic Lift; Bernoulli Lift and Reaction Lift, including the Equations and the Math. (April 2003)
Non-Metal Airliners in Lightning Storms. Older airliners had metal bodies, where lightning bolts would remain OUTSIDE the aircraft due to the Faraday Cage effect. Modern airliners are not made of metal, to try to save weight. It may be a very dumb idea.. (Dec 2014)
Flying Delivery Truck which gets 60 miles per gallon. Extremely Unstable Flight. (Aug 2012)
Aircraft Tire Preservation - Inexpensive and Simple. Adding simple textured hubcaps to airliner wheels so they naturally upspin when the landing gear is lowered. (Feb 1988)
Food Delivery to Third World Areas. Using older General Aviation Aircraft to robotically deliver Food Aid to remote locations. (Aug 2011)
Efficient Airfoil Flight - Active Surface - TURCAN. A Meta-Stable Method of Actively Reducing Turbulence and Drag around Airfoils. Excellent improvement in aircraft fuel efficiency. (summer 1998)
Stealth Technology for Huge Ocean-Going Ships. Stealth Technology for Huge Ocean-Going Ships. (1990)
600-mph Ocean-Going Fast Ships?. The Possibility of 600 mph sailing ships. (Sept 2012)
Bird Flight - Scientific Analysis of the Efficiency. (Nov 2007)
Making Airliners Safer with Password-Protected Instruments. Cockpit control blackouts. (Sept 12, 2001)
Paper Airplane World Record - Using Natural Advantages. You can certainly beat my 10 minute flight of a paper airplane. (June 2013)

Energy-Related presentations in this Domain:

Self-Sufficiency - Many Suggestions A thorough presentation
Global Warming - The Physics of the Process. (June 2004, June 2008)
Global Warming and Climate Change - The Physics (June 2004, Feb. 2007)
Alternative GREEN Water Heater - Non-Fossil-Fueled HeatGreen - A Simple Water Heater, HG3a (biodecomposition) (March 2007)
Alternative GREEN Furnace with no Fire - Non-Fossil-Fueled HeatGreen - A Simple, Home Heating Furnace, HG3a (biodecomposition) (March 2007)
Solar Heating - Low-Tech Active System Low-tech, low cost approach (April 2007)
Heat and Cool a House Naturally, without a Furnace or Air Conditioner (1977, Nov. 2000)
Energy Supplies of the World - Petroleum, Coal, Gas, Uranium. Oil, Natural Gas, Uranium supplies and consumption (May 2010 Report)
Asphalt Pavement - Black Surfaces and Sunlight Environmental Effects of Asphalt Pavements, Roofs, and Parking Lots (August 2007)
Earth Spinning Energy - Perfect Energy Source From the Earth's Spinning (1990, Nov. 2002)
Earth's Spinning - Perfect Energy Source (1990, Dec. 2009)
Tornadoes - The Physics of How They Operate. Tornadoes, including How they Form. A potential energy source (Feb. 2000, May 2009)
Electricity - Unlimited Source of Solar by an Artificial Tornado. Tornadoes, including How they Form. A potential energy source (Feb. 2000, May 2009)
Survival Ark - 60-Acre Hexagonal Artificial Island, Floating Communities for Survival For Sealevel Rising (July 2008)
Electric Power Plants - Climate Effects
Global Warming Effects of Carbon Dioxide
Hydrogen as a Fuel for Vehicles. (August 2003)
Solar Heated House NorthWarm Totally 100% Solar Heated House - Version 1 (1979)
Solar Cells Photovoltaic Cells, PV, Electricity from Sunlight (Jan 2002)
200 mph, Safe, Self-Driving Cars, Trucks, Economical 200 mile per hour TRANS Super-Efficient Transportation System (invented in 1989)
Electric Cars, Hybrid Cars, the Physics Battery-Powered, Hybrid Cars and Hydrogen-Powered Vehicles (April 2006)
Wind Power, Wind Energy, Practical Windmills Practical Wind-Generated Electricity (Residential, some Watts) (1975 and April 1998)
Tower Windmills and Electricity, Modest Efficiency Practical Large-Scale Wind-Generated Electricity, 1200 KiloWatts (Community, a thousand homes) (a million construction jobs and 12,000 MegaWatts of electricity Nationally) (June 2007)
Earth Energy Flow Rates due to Precessional Effects (63,000 MegaWatts of Energy) (Sept 2006)
Power Plant Wastes - Productive Usage of Nuclear Waste. Productive Disposal of Nuclear Power Plant Wastes (1980s, Sept 2005)
Conserving Energy - Methods and Processes
Energy Storage - Methods - Efficiencies Various Methods
Solar Energy - How Much Energy Comes From the Sun
Sun and Stars - How the Sun Works - Nuclear Fusion. Creating Light and Heat
Energy Inventions - Many Forms of Energy Supplies. Related to Energy Crises
Solar Energy - Generating Electricity From solar, wind or other sources nearly 24 Hours a Day (2001, tested 2003)
Solar Energy - Generating Electricity, Improved A Unique Method of Using Solar Energy to Generate Electricity (late 2010)
Alaska Pipeline - Alyeska - Physics. Pipeline Local Climate Effects (August 2005)
Home Air Conditioning Natural, GREEN and FREE! (1978, December 2000)
Hybrid Vehicle - An Improvement. An Entirely Different Approach to a Hybrid Vehicle (1992, May 2008)
Woodburning Furnace - JUCA Fireplace, Woodstove - JUCA Super-Fireplaces (designed 1972, manufactured 1973 on, still not matched)
Burning Wood for Heating - The Physics. Wood as a Heating Fuel (published 1978)
North Pole is Heating Very Fast. Faster than anywhere else on Earth.
Global Warming and Climate - Possible Solutions
Aerodynamic Lift - How Airplanes Fly. Bernoulli Effect, Reaction Lift (April 2003)
Efficient Airfoil Flight - Active Surface - TURCAN. Greatly Reducing Turbulence and Drag for Aircraft and Airfoils, TURCAN (summer 1998)
Construction School for GREEN Technologies. My Concept of a GREEN Campus (1990, Dec 2008)
Conservation of Angular Momentum - An Exception or Violation. A Violation of the Conservation of Angular Momentum (Sept 2006)
Hurricanes, the Physics and Analysis A Credible Approach to Hurricane Reduction (Feb 2001)
Automotive Engine - A More Efficient Approach. Significant Improvement (2001)
Global Warming - The Politics and Business Why No Leaders Seem to See Urgency in Global Warming
Energy from the Moon - A Version of Tidal Energy Collection. (Artificial Tides) (1998, 2010)
Energy from the Moon - Version of Tidal Energy Collection 2. (Energy Harvesting) (1975, 2010)
Electricity from Solar, Wind, Water, More. Make All Your Own GREEN Electricity (2001, 2003, 2010)
Woodstove Energy Production and Efficiency, from a Radiant Woodstove (published 1979)
Firewood Ratings. Firewood Info Chart.

This page - - - - is at
This subject presentation was last updated on - -

Link to the Public Services Home Page


Link to the Science Projects Index - Public Service


E-mail to: cj@mb-soft.com

C Johnson, Theoretical Physicist, Physics Degree from Univ of Chicago