The semester is quickly winding down & I figured the @UTSA students in my undergraduate Measurements & Instrumentation class could use some extra credit, so I had them make memes about the class!
Main rules were to keep it clean, relevant to the class, & fun
Needless to say, as this class involves a lot of circuits & statistics, not all of our Mechanical Engineering students are starting from the same place...
The math and statistics were not always easy
And learning to use a micrometer is a bit of a rite of passage for Mech. Eng. undergrads
We learned about correlations (and covered the finer points of r^2, which I am not entirely confident got across)
We covered the Nyquist theorem
Then learned a lot about filter circuits
Unfortunately things covered in lecture don't always go as planned in the lab
There was much fun had with Wheatstone Bridge circuits, which apparently were simultaneously over-complex and underwhelming 😂
There is also clearly a difference of opinion on analog vs. digital data acquisition, which I can respect
I even took some time to introduce optical diagnostic techniques, and it seems to have gone over well
In summary, this is a very fun class (for me at least) and I can't wait to teach it again. I'm glad the students are taking away some valuable knowledge that will translate to their engineering careers
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
So, if I understand correctly, it sounds like GE has successfully tested a turbine-based combined-cycle engine that incorporates: 1) gas turbine; 2) rotating detonation engine; 3) ramjet; 4) scramjet 🤯
As we approach what may be a historic Starship flight test, this Reuters report is really, really bad
No excuses: as arguably the number one launch provider *in the world* the safety culture at SpaceX has to be better. They should be setting the standard (in a good way)
If we are going to continue giving them billions annually in taxpayer dollars, they can’t keep treating workers like disposable meat puppets
And yes before you ask these numbers are much worse than industry averages
This is an absolutely total systematic failure that goes beyond SpaceX—NASA has some explaining to do about how they allowed SpaceX to operate in their own backyard allowing a > 20% injury rate
If you're ever frustrated by someone with a PhD acting like a know-it-all outside their niche field of study, just remember that Albert Einstein tried to design an airfoil but it performed so poorly during testing it's flight characteristics were compared to a "pregnant duck"
HT to @milan_tomicc for reminding me of this the other day
For a bit more technical insight, bottom line is that Einstein designed this entirely using Bernoulli theory.
Stall at 12deg AoA @ 92 L/D
He later confessed he was "ashamed" and "this is what can happen to a man that thinks a lot but reads little"
Am I being unreasonable in thinking that "clearing the launch pad" (that everyone knew would be destroyed) is a bit of a low bar for arguably the most successful launch company *ever*?
There are tons of insanely smart, hard-working, talented people there
NASA needs Starship to put boots on the moon
So I expect more than what we got yesterday
When some brand new startup or a university rocket club sends their rocket into a death spiral at T+4min we all pat them on the back and say "space is hard" and "you'll figure it out"
I hold SpaceX (and NASA) to a much higher standard. SpaceX is better than this. It wasn't ready
Some quick notes about this images: first, this is from a technique called schlieren imaging and what you are seeing are density gradients in the flow. helps to visualize shock waves, expansion fans, etc.