P plate training ...not
in [Aussie Motorcycles]
|
Prev: new tv project
Next: Honda VTR coolant boiling ?
From: Hammo on 14 Feb 2007 02:59 On 14/2/07 2:26 PM, in article slrnet50aa.33n.sharkey(a)anchovy.zoic.org, "sharkey" <sharkey(a)zoic.org> wrote: > Knobdoodle <knobdoodle(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> Now go look under the bonnet and see if anything is glowing cherry-red. >> If not; your assumption about how your charging-system works must be wrong. > > You poor deluded fool Clemmo! Heatsinks are made of aluminium, and > every schoolchild knows that aluminum melts at 660�C so the heatsink > cannot possibly be glowing cherry red! > > Nev, go and look under your car for a pool of molten aluminium ... ....and what temp does it combust at? Hammo (No wonder they ain't insulated by Kevlar).
From: Iain Chalmers on 14 Feb 2007 03:16 In article <C1F90765.26A7B%hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au>, Hammo <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote: > On 14/2/07 1:18 PM, in article > bigiain-DB0328.13183714022007(a)nasal.pacific.net.au, "Iain Chalmers" > <bigiain(a)mightymedia.com.au> wrote: > > > In article <C1F8B385.26876%hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au>, > > Hammo <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote: > > > >> Sorry to ruin the party boys.... > >> > >> I don't know of too many machines that "idle" every where. > > > > Look again Hammo, I don't even mention engine speed anywhere in my > > calculations, just energy used over time - I don't care if you idle your > > car for an hour or if you run it at redline in top gear up a hill for an > > hour, the headlights will use an extra ~0.12L either way... > > No. Thanks for trying to bluff that one. Remember the discussion re: > torque...... I'd given up on the torque discussion since you were clearly not going to admit that you don't understand how a typical automotive alternator _can_ present different input torque loads at the same rpm thanks to the existence of it's rotor windings and the variable current the regulator can run through them. It's easy enough to understand - more current = stronger magnet -> stronger magnet = more force -> force going round in circle = torque. I'm astounded you're continuing to play stupid enough to not understand that. But it doesn't matter - I'm arguing this one purely on energy in vs energy out using some publicly available estimates of efficiency and some assumptions about the errors in them. You're a chemist right? You know about energy and energy conversion and stuff? You know, _real_ energy, measured in joules? That "can't destroy it can only convert it from one form to another" kind of energy? Probably way better than I do. Dispute my numbers or point out the errors in my methodology. Or man up like Sharkey did and admit you're wrong. Or don't. Whatever. > > GS mentioned speed as a way to suggest that the figures were in agreeance. > Perhaps you missed that? Perhaps you missed the 12 v vs 24 v comment as > well? So you're suggesting that 1000 12V watts are somehow different from 1000 24V watts are you? Or that 1000W at 800rpm is a different amount of power to 1000W at 5000rpm? That's some good stuff you've been smoking since you left uni if that's what you believe these days... > > > >> Also, we were talking about headlights. Your calculation are now going to > >> have to include the inefficiencies/resistance in _all_ those systems. > > > > Fortunately, we don't actually have to concern ourselves there - if > > headlight globes were rated in lumens or candlepower we would, but > > they're actually rated in power consumed - a 60W globe has a 100% > > efficiency when measured in terms of how much power it consumes. > > Yeah, I mean, lets *not* consider efficiency..... Obfuscation ahoy!! Hammo? Put down the crack pipe and open the window, dude! Or, on the slight possibility that you think that statement made any sense at all... First define your terms. Explain to me exactly how you intend to measure the efficiency with which a 60W light globe consumes 60W? Or are you somehow suggesting that my wikipedia-ed up efficiency estimates for the engine and alternator efficiencies and my estimates of the errors likely to be associated with them are somehow "obfuscating" the issue? Or are you on crack? > > > > You were going to show us some calculations of your own Hammo, how'd you > > get on? > > As I said, when I get home. I'm still 400 odd kays and coupla days from > that. You'll excuse me for being sceptical that you'll actually post any calculations that show us how wrong you are... (with your current posting style, I'm pretty sure you won't actually be capable of doing any calculations...) > > BTW, I looked at your numbers again, as well as your assumptions, can you > tell me why you are getting the same consumption figure regardless of speed, > regardless of engine rpm? Yep, 'cause the energy consumed by the headlights is independant of the engine rpm and road speed - at least to a first (+-40%) approximation. See above. Go get your 1st year physics textbooks back from the hockshop and read the first couple of chapters again... big -- "Everything you love, everything meaningful with depth and history, all passionate authentic experiences will be appropriated, mishandled, watered down, cheapened, repackaged, marketed and sold to the people you hate." Mr Jalopy quoting Hooptyrides (on jalopyjunktown.com)
From: Dale Porter on 14 Feb 2007 03:37 "Hammo" <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote >> You poor deluded fool Clemmo! Heatsinks are made of aluminium, and >> every schoolchild knows that aluminum melts at 660�C so the heatsink >> cannot possibly be glowing cherry red! >> >> Nev, go and look under your car for a pool of molten aluminium ... > > ...and what temp does it combust at? > > I'm gonna guess it's a fuggin' high temp. I know they use aluminium in solid fuel booster rockets to enhance the power output. -- Dale Porter GPX250 -> CBR600 -> VTR1000 + VT250F-J
From: G-S on 14 Feb 2007 04:10 sharkey wrote: > Knobdoodle <knobdoodle(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> Now go look under the bonnet and see if anything is glowing cherry-red. >> If not; your assumption about how your charging-system works must be wrong. > > You poor deluded fool Clemmo! Heatsinks are made of aluminium <snip> *looks inside his computer* Nope... only copper heatsinks in there :) G-S
From: Knobdoodle on 14 Feb 2007 04:11
"Hammo" <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote in message news:C1F80B02.26617%hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au... > > > > On 14/2/07 12:23 AM, in article > qZiAh.570$4c6.47(a)news-server.bigpond.net.au, > "Knobdoodle" <knobdoodle(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >> "Hammo" <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote in message >> news:C1F8054A.26609%hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au... >>> >>> >>> >>> On 13/2/07 7:53 PM, in article >>> 45d17c77$0$31857$5a62ac22(a)per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au, "Nev.." >>> <idiot(a)mindless.com> wrote: >>> >>>> G-S wrote: > >>>>>> >>>>> Repeatable yes... accurate no. >>>> >>>> How do you know ? >>> >>> By his own assertion, contradicted himself! >>> >> [yawn] >> Gee the obfuscator seems to be getting a bit dim there Hammo. >> Maybe you need to divert some more of that magic non-fuelled power to it! > > Perhaps you'd like to consider what accurate and repeatable mean? > > Would you like a book on statistics, or will JL help you out? Feel free > to > make it easier for Nev to highlight his results, as, that is what you are > doing!!! Thanks also to GS!! > > Do come again.... > So long as you're having a good time then I'm happy Hammo. -- Clem |