FYFD

Tag: sports

  • Tokyo 2020: Sailing Physics

    Tokyo 2020: Sailing Physics

    At first glance, sailboats don’t look much like an airplane, but physics-wise, they’re closely related. Both the sail and hull of a sailboat act like wings turned on their side. Just as with airplane wings, the driving force for a sail comes from a difference in pressure across the two sides of the sail. The same effects applied to the hull and its keel (the wing-like extension that sits below the hull) provide the force that keeps a sailboat from slipping sideways as it cuts a path through wind and water.

    Like airplane wings, sailboats also generate tip vortices: one from the top of the sail, the other from the bottom of the keel. Those vortices are typically invisible, but in foggy weather, like in the photo below, you can see the tracks they leave behind. (Image credits: top – Ludomił; bottom – D. Forster; research credit: B. Anderson; submitted by Lluís J.)

    The vortices from sailboats leave tracks in the fog.

    Follow along all this week and next as we celebrate the Olympics with sports-themed fluid dynamics.

  • Tokyo 2020: Volleyball Aerodynamics

    Tokyo 2020: Volleyball Aerodynamics

    Like footballs and baseballs, the trajectory of a volleyball is strongly influenced by aerodynamics. When spinning, the ball experiences a difference in pressure on either side, which causes it to swerve, per the Magnus effect. But volleyball also has the float serve, which like the knuckleball in baseball, uses no spin. 

    In this case, how the ball behaves depends strongly on the way the ball is made. Some volleyballs use smooth panels, while others have surfaces modified with dimples or honeycomb patterns, and researchers found that these subtle changes make a big difference in aerodynamics. A float serve’s trajectory is unpredictable because the ball will swerve whenever air near the surface of the ball on one side goes turbulent or separates. And without spin to influence that transition, everything comes down to the ball’s speed and its surface.

    Researchers found that volleyballs with patterned surfaces transition to turbulence at lower speeds, which makes their behavior more predictable overall. But players who want to maximize the unpredictability of their float serve might prefer smooth-paneled balls, which don’t make the transition until higher speeds. (Image credit: game – Pixabay, volleyballs – U. Tsukuba; research credit: S. Hong et al., T. Asai et al.; via Ars Technica)

    Stick around all this week and next for more Olympic-themed fluid physics!

  • COVID-19 and Outdoor Exercise

    COVID-19 and Outdoor Exercise

    By now you’ve probably come across some blog posts and news articles about a new pre-print study looking at the aerodynamics of running and the potential exposure to exhaled droplets. And you may also have seen articles questioning the accuracy and validity of such simulations. I’ve had several readers submit questions about this, so I dug into both the research and the criticisms, and here are my thoughts:

    Is this study scientifically valid?

    I’ve seen a number of complaints that since this paper hasn’t been peer-reviewed, we shouldn’t trust anything about it. That seems like an unreasonable overreaction to me considering how many studies receive press attention prior to their actual peer-reviewed publication. This is not a random CFD simulation produced by someone who just downloaded a copy of ANSYS Fluent. This work comes from a well-established group of engineers specializing in sports aerodynamics, and long-time readers will no doubt recognize some of their previous publications. Over the past decade, Blocken and his colleagues have become well-known for detailed experimental and simulation work that indicates larger aerodynamic effects in slipstreams than what we generally recognize.

    In this paper, they lay out previous (biological) studies related to SARS and droplet exhalation; they use those papers and several wind tunnel studies to validate computational models of droplet evaporation and runner aerodynamics; and then they use those inputs to simulate how a cloud of exhaled droplets from one runner affects someone running alongside, behind, or in a staggered position relative to the first runner.

    In other words, their work includes all the components one would expect of a scientific study, and it makes scientifically justifiable assumptions with regard to its methods. (That’s not, mind you, to say that no one can disagree with some of those choices, but that’s true of plenty of peer-reviewed work as well.) All in all, yes, this is a scientifically valid study, even if it has not yet undergone formal peer-review*.

    Can simulations actually tell us anything about virus transmission?

    One complaint I’ve seen from both biologists and engineers is that simulations like these don’t actually capture the full physics and biology involved in virus transmission. While I agree with that general sentiment, I would point out two important facts:

    1) Blocken et al. acknowledge that this is not a virology study and confine their scientific results to looking at what happens physically to droplets when two people are moving relative to one another. Whether those droplets can transmit disease or not is a question left to biological researchers.

    2) Most medical and biological research also does not account for the physics of droplet transmission and transport. For the past century, this research has focused almost exclusively on droplet sizes, with the assumption that large droplets fall quickly and small droplets persist a little longer. To my knowledge, some of the only work done on the actual physics of the turbulent cloud produced by coughing or sneezing comes from Lydia Bourouiba’s lab at MIT. And, to me, one of the fundamental conclusions from her work is that droplets (especially small ones) can persist a lot longer and farther than previously assumed. Can those droplets facilitate transmission of COVID-19? The general consensus I’ve seen expressed by medical experts is no, but, to my knowledge, that is based on opinion and assumption, not on an actual scientific study.

    The bottom line

    In my opinion, there’s a big disconnect right now between the medical/biological community and the engineering community. To truly capture the physics and biology of COVID-19 transmission requires the expertise and cooperation of both. Right now both sides are making potentially dangerous assertions.

    Honestly, based on what I know about aerodynamics, I am personally skeptical as to whether 6 ft of physical separation is truly enough; whether it is or not seems to depend on how transmissible the novel coronavirus is through small droplets, which, again, to my knowledge, is unestablished.

    Should we leave more distance than 6ft between us when exercising outdoors? Absolutely. Aerodynamically, it makes perfect sense that following in someone’s slipstream would put you inside their droplet cloud, which needs time and space to disperse. Personally, I’ve sidestepped the question entirely by doing all my cycling indoors while quarantined.

    tl;dr: There are a lot of open questions right now about COVID-19 transmission and what qualifies as safe distancing, but it’s smarter to err on the side of more distancing. Don’t hang close to others when running or cycling outdoors.

    (Image and research credit: B. Blocken et al.; submitted by Corky W. and Wendy H.)

    *I will add that, with my training, I have and do occasionally peer-review studies such as this one, and I read the full paper with the same sort of critical eye I would turn to a paper I was asked to review.

  • Paddling

    Paddling

    When I lived in New England, I often spent summers paddling around a lake in either a kayak or canoe. Every stroke was an opportunity to stare down into the dark water and watch how the flow curled around my oar. Here you see a bit of what that looks like from underwater.

    The animation above shows a flat plate – twice as tall as it is wide – submerged about 20 mm below the surface and accelerated steadily from rest. As it starts moving, there’s a clear vortex ring formed and shed behind it. You can also see how the plate distorts the free surface into large depressions. Both of these cause extra drag on the plate. Eventually, though, the plate reaches a steady state.

    All together, what you see here is a good representation of what’s going on when a rower first begins to accelerate their boat from rest. Hydrodynamically speaking, the best way to do that isn’t to dig in with a deep stroke. It’s to use a series of short, relatively shallow strokes to get the boat up to speed. This takes advantage of the efficiency of drag generation during acceleration to get the boat to its cruising speed quickly. (Image and research credit: E. Grift et al.)

  • Stone Skipping Physics

    Stone Skipping Physics

    The current record for stone-skipping is about 88 skips. For most of us, that’s an unimaginably high number, but according to physicists, human throwers may top out around 300 or 350 skips. In the video above and the accompanying article, Wired reporter Robbie Gonzalez explores both the technique of a world-record-holding skip and the physics that enable it.

    The perfect skip requires many ingredients: a large, flat rock with good edges; a strong throw to spin the rock and hold it steady at the right angle of attack; and a good first contact with the right entry angle and force to set up the skips’ trajectory. The video is long, but it’s well worth a full watch. It gives you an inside look both at a master skipper and at the experts of skipping science. (Video and image credit: Wired; see also: Splash Lab, C. Clanet et al.; submitted by Kam-Yung Soh)

    ETA: Wired’s embed code is acting up, so if you can’t see the stone skipping video here, just go to the article directly.

    Heads up for those going to the APS DFD meeting! You can catch my talk Monday, Nov. 19th at 5:10PM in Room B206. I’ll be talking about how to use narrative devices to tell scientific stories. I’ll be around for the whole meeting, so feel free to come say hi!

  • Kelly Slater’s Surf Ranch

    Kelly Slater’s Surf Ranch

    Many of us who grew up visiting water parks instead of ocean beaches have spent time bobbing in a wave pool. They’ve been around for decades. But a new generation of wave pools are aiming for a different goal: the perfect surf wave. One of the foremost current facilities is Kelly Slater’s Surf Ranch, shown above. Here a hydrofoil (draped in blue tarps on the left) is pulled along an artificial lagoon to create dozens of wave profiles, all engineered to give surfers a long ride on the perfect solitary wave.

    Other facilities, like the surf ranch used by USA Surfing in Waco, Texas, design their waves with different goals in mind. The Waco wave pool uses air pressure to drive their waves, and aims for a larger quantity of shorter waves. They’re designed to help young surfers practice skills they’re working on, and to give them a place where they can experience waves like those they’ll face in the upcoming 2020 Olympics in Tokyo. (Image credit: R. Young/WIRED; CNet, source; submitted by Lionel V.)

  • The Protection of the Peloton

    The Protection of the Peloton

    It’s well-known by professional cyclists that sitting in the middle of the peloton requires little effort to overcome aerodynamic drag, but now, for the first time, there’s a scientific study to back that up. Researchers built their own quarter-scale peloton of 121 riders to investigate the aerodynamic effect of cycling in such a large group versus riding solo. Through wind tunnel studies and numerical simulation, they found that riders deep in the peloton can experience as little as 5-10% of the aerodynamic drag of a solo cyclist. 

    Tactically, this means teams should aim to position their protected leader or sprinter mid-way in the pack, where they’ll receive lots of shelter without risking one of the crashes common near the back of the peloton. It also suggests that teams wanting to isolate another team’s leader should try to push them toward the outer edges of the peloton rather than letting them sit in the middle. It will be interesting to see whether pro teams shift their race strategies at all with these numbers in hand.

    Of course, this study considers only a pure headwind. But other groups are looking at the effects of side winds on cyclists. (Image credit: J. Miranda; image and research credit: B. Blocken et al.; submitted by 1307phaezr)

  • Featured Video Play Icon

    Swimming, Cycling, and Sailing

    Summer brings with it lots of great sports, and whether you love riding a bike, sailing a boat, or just hanging out at the pool, our latest FYFD/JFM video has something for you. Want even more sports physics? Check out the Olympic series we did for the London and Rio games. And if you’re looking for more of the latest fluids research, don’t miss the rest of our video series. (Video and image credit: N. Sharp and T. Crawford)

  • PyeongChang 2018: Curling

    PyeongChang 2018: Curling

    Curling is a deceptively engrossing sport with some unique physics among Winter Olympic events. Athletes slide 19kg granite stones at a target 28 meters away. Along the way, teammates sweep the pebbled ice with brooms, melting it with frictional heating to help the stone slide further. The underside of the stones is concave, so they only touch the ice along a narrow ring. Researchers think roughness in the leading edge of the sliding stone cuts into the ice, leaving scratches that the trailing edge tries to follow. This is what causes the stone’s trajectory to curl. By melting the ice, sweeping also prevents curling, so competitors must know exactly when and how much to sweep. Ice conditions shift throughout a match, and the best players can read the ice to keep their stones where they want them. (Image credit: AP; W. Zhao/GettyImages)

  • PyeongChang 2018: Cross-Country Skiing

    PyeongChang 2018: Cross-Country Skiing

    Cross-country skiing, also known as Nordic skiing, is a part of many longstanding disciplines in the Winter Games. Unlike downhill skiing, cross-country events typically involve mass starts, which allow athletes to interact, using one another for pacing and tactics. Drafting can be a valuable method to save energy and reduce drag. A following skier sees a 25% drag reduction while drafting; the lead skier gets about a 3% reduction in drag compared to skiing solo. Competitors usually wear tight-fitting suits to minimize drag, but unlike speedskating, for example, cross-country skiers don’t get much benefit from roughened surfaces and impermeable fabrics. Typical race speeds are 4 – 9 m/s, and most of these high-tech fabrics don’t provide tangible benefits until higher speeds. (Image credit: Reuters/S. Karpukhin, US Biathlon, GettyImages/Q. Rooney)