C
Cydrome Leader
Guest
John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
LOL!
LOL!
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
C
Cydrome Leader
Guest
John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
LOL!
On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 19:40:48 +0200, Piotr Wyderski
peter.pan@neverland.mil> wrote:
jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
How do Europeans measure tire pressure?
In \"atmospheres\" or bars. My car has the correct pressure hint plaque
defined in atm. This is the same up to ~1% accuracy, but much clearer to
laymen.
Best regards, Piotr
Is that absolute pressure, or relative to atmospheric? Is a flat tire
0 or 1?
LOL!
S
server
Guest
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 5:01:30 PM UTC-10, Ricketty C wrote:
A torque wrench rotates a bolt to store energy
in the spring steel threads. A force of one Newton
with a wrench 1 meter long will store 1 Joule of
energy and heat in the bolt. The bending of the threads
is like a spring storing energy.
The Ohm is the number of events per second. An event
can be an electron hitting an atom. Each event takes
energy. More Ohms means more collisions of electrons
that lose energy.
Ohm = Volt / Ampere
Volt = Joules per Coulomb
Joules energy equals force times distance
force is mass times meter per second^2
Joule = kg meter^2 / second^2
Volt = (kg/Coulomb) * meter^2 / second^2
Ampere = Coulomb per second
Ohm = (kg/Coulomb^2) * meter^2 / second
\"Using the mass=area theory, charge is also an area.\"
Ohm = (area/area^2) * meter^2 / second
Ohm = 1 / second
http://fcgravity.blogspot.com/p/first-law-of-difffusion-of-herenowium.html
This theory has not been approved by educators.
Alan Folmsbee, MSEE
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 6:11:07 PM UTC-4, omni...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 11:41:38 AM UTC-10, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 12:23:22 AM UTC-6, Ricketty C wrote:
I thought the point of SI was to unify the use of units so everyone could speak the same language? On this ventilator I am find many ways of expressing the same pressure and flow rates.
Pascals
mmH2O
cmH2O
mBar
and another one I didn\'t even recognize. lol
Likewise I\'m finding flow rates indicated as either
ml/s
SLM (standard liters per minute)
WTF?! Why have multiple units like this? This is all in the same field really. People just like to use different units.
Damn them to hell!!!
--
Rick C.
- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Torque units are equally frustrating. According to SI it is supposed to be Nm. I am always converting Nm, Ncm, ft-lb, in-lb., oz-in., etc.
We are also a chemistry lab. Concentration units...grrr! This is worse. Units can be mass-per-volume or number-per-volume. Depending on the industry we are serving, the preferred units are different. It gets a bit obnoxious constantly converting mg/mL to nanomolar (for instance). Since our software analysis needs everything in molarity, I am often scrambling to find the molecular weight of this that and the other thing. And that is just the metric units!
Always makes me chuckle when somebody says Americans don\'t understand metric. We understand metric just fine, we just also happen to know a bunch of other units and know how to convert between them.
One atmosphere of pressure is 101,325 Pascals metric.
Torque is in units of Joules
So does a torque of 1 Nm do 1 joule of work in a radian of rotation?
The Ohm is events per second.
Got me on that one. How does that work?
--
Rick C.
++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
A torque wrench rotates a bolt to store energy
in the spring steel threads. A force of one Newton
with a wrench 1 meter long will store 1 Joule of
energy and heat in the bolt. The bending of the threads
is like a spring storing energy.
The Ohm is the number of events per second. An event
can be an electron hitting an atom. Each event takes
energy. More Ohms means more collisions of electrons
that lose energy.
Ohm = Volt / Ampere
Volt = Joules per Coulomb
Joules energy equals force times distance
force is mass times meter per second^2
Joule = kg meter^2 / second^2
Volt = (kg/Coulomb) * meter^2 / second^2
Ampere = Coulomb per second
Ohm = (kg/Coulomb^2) * meter^2 / second
\"Using the mass=area theory, charge is also an area.\"
Ohm = (area/area^2) * meter^2 / second
Ohm = 1 / second
http://fcgravity.blogspot.com/p/first-law-of-difffusion-of-herenowium.html
This theory has not been approved by educators.
Alan Folmsbee, MSEE
S
server
Guest
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 5:01:30 PM UTC-10, Ricketty C wrote:
A torque wrench rotates a bolt to store energy
in the spring steel threads. A force of one Newton
with a wrench 1 meter long will store 1 Joule of
energy and heat in the bolt. The bending of the threads
is like a spring storing energy.
The Ohm is the number of events per second. An event
can be an electron hitting an atom. Each event takes
energy. More Ohms means more collisions of electrons
that lose energy.
Ohm = Volt / Ampere
Volt = Joules per Coulomb
Joules energy equals force times distance
force is mass times meter per second^2
Joule = kg meter^2 / second^2
Volt = (kg/Coulomb) * meter^2 / second^2
Ampere = Coulomb per second
Ohm = (kg/Coulomb^2) * meter^2 / second
\"Using the mass=area theory, charge is also an area.\"
Ohm = (area/area^2) * meter^2 / second
Ohm = 1 / second
http://fcgravity.blogspot.com/p/first-law-of-difffusion-of-herenowium.html
This theory has not been approved by educators.
Alan Folmsbee, MSEE
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 6:11:07 PM UTC-4, omni...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 11:41:38 AM UTC-10, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 12:23:22 AM UTC-6, Ricketty C wrote:
I thought the point of SI was to unify the use of units so everyone could speak the same language? On this ventilator I am find many ways of expressing the same pressure and flow rates.
Pascals
mmH2O
cmH2O
mBar
and another one I didn\'t even recognize. lol
Likewise I\'m finding flow rates indicated as either
ml/s
SLM (standard liters per minute)
WTF?! Why have multiple units like this? This is all in the same field really. People just like to use different units.
Damn them to hell!!!
--
Rick C.
- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Torque units are equally frustrating. According to SI it is supposed to be Nm. I am always converting Nm, Ncm, ft-lb, in-lb., oz-in., etc.
We are also a chemistry lab. Concentration units...grrr! This is worse. Units can be mass-per-volume or number-per-volume. Depending on the industry we are serving, the preferred units are different. It gets a bit obnoxious constantly converting mg/mL to nanomolar (for instance). Since our software analysis needs everything in molarity, I am often scrambling to find the molecular weight of this that and the other thing. And that is just the metric units!
Always makes me chuckle when somebody says Americans don\'t understand metric. We understand metric just fine, we just also happen to know a bunch of other units and know how to convert between them.
One atmosphere of pressure is 101,325 Pascals metric.
Torque is in units of Joules
So does a torque of 1 Nm do 1 joule of work in a radian of rotation?
The Ohm is events per second.
Got me on that one. How does that work?
--
Rick C.
++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
A torque wrench rotates a bolt to store energy
in the spring steel threads. A force of one Newton
with a wrench 1 meter long will store 1 Joule of
energy and heat in the bolt. The bending of the threads
is like a spring storing energy.
The Ohm is the number of events per second. An event
can be an electron hitting an atom. Each event takes
energy. More Ohms means more collisions of electrons
that lose energy.
Ohm = Volt / Ampere
Volt = Joules per Coulomb
Joules energy equals force times distance
force is mass times meter per second^2
Joule = kg meter^2 / second^2
Volt = (kg/Coulomb) * meter^2 / second^2
Ampere = Coulomb per second
Ohm = (kg/Coulomb^2) * meter^2 / second
\"Using the mass=area theory, charge is also an area.\"
Ohm = (area/area^2) * meter^2 / second
Ohm = 1 / second
http://fcgravity.blogspot.com/p/first-law-of-difffusion-of-herenowium.html
This theory has not been approved by educators.
Alan Folmsbee, MSEE
C
Clifford Heath
Guest
On 20/7/20 8:00 pm, Piotr Wyderski wrote:
It\'s the cross-section area of a long thread of fuel that you car can
use to follow without losing speed. Ours does better than 0.1mm^2 only
on the highway, approximately a 0.25mm diameter thread of fuel. That
doesn\'t seem like much.
For electric cars, the measure is newtons, the force required to
maintain velocity against drag. Even for gasoline cars, that would be
more instructive, with a separate efficiency measure for the engine.
Clifford Heath.
Ricketty C wrote:
I thought the point of SI was to unify the use of units so everyone
could speak the same language?
People cannot even agree what a ton is.
WTF?! Why have multiple units like this?
Do you express fuel consumption of cars in square meters, as it should
have always been? This is the cross-section area of the virtual stream
of fuel running along your car when you are driving. Self-normalised,
doesn\'t need any \"per 100km\".
It\'s the cross-section area of a long thread of fuel that you car can
use to follow without losing speed. Ours does better than 0.1mm^2 only
on the highway, approximately a 0.25mm diameter thread of fuel. That
doesn\'t seem like much.
For electric cars, the measure is newtons, the force required to
maintain velocity against drag. Even for gasoline cars, that would be
more instructive, with a separate efficiency measure for the engine.
Clifford Heath.
S
server
Guest
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 5:01:30 PM UTC-10, Ricketty C wrote:
A torque wrench rotates a bolt to store energy
in the spring steel threads. A force of one Newton
with a wrench 1 meter long will store 1 Joule of
energy and heat in the bolt. The bending of the threads
is like a spring storing energy.
The Ohm is the number of events per second. An event
can be an electron hitting an atom. Each event takes
energy. More Ohms means more collisions of electrons
that lose energy.
Ohm = Volt / Ampere
Volt = Joules per Coulomb
Joules energy equals force times distance
force is mass times meter per second^2
Joule = kg meter^2 / second^2
Volt = (kg/Coulomb) * meter^2 / second^2
Ampere = Coulomb per second
Ohm = (kg/Coulomb^2) * meter^2 / second
\"Using the mass=area theory, charge is also an area.\"
Ohm = (area/area^2) * meter^2 / second
Ohm = 1 / second
http://fcgravity.blogspot.com/p/first-law-of-difffusion-of-herenowium.html
This theory has not been approved by educators.
Alan Folmsbee, MSEE
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 6:11:07 PM UTC-4, omni...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 11:41:38 AM UTC-10, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 12:23:22 AM UTC-6, Ricketty C wrote:
I thought the point of SI was to unify the use of units so everyone could speak the same language? On this ventilator I am find many ways of expressing the same pressure and flow rates.
Pascals
mmH2O
cmH2O
mBar
and another one I didn\'t even recognize. lol
Likewise I\'m finding flow rates indicated as either
ml/s
SLM (standard liters per minute)
WTF?! Why have multiple units like this? This is all in the same field really. People just like to use different units.
Damn them to hell!!!
--
Rick C.
- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Torque units are equally frustrating. According to SI it is supposed to be Nm. I am always converting Nm, Ncm, ft-lb, in-lb., oz-in., etc.
We are also a chemistry lab. Concentration units...grrr! This is worse. Units can be mass-per-volume or number-per-volume. Depending on the industry we are serving, the preferred units are different. It gets a bit obnoxious constantly converting mg/mL to nanomolar (for instance). Since our software analysis needs everything in molarity, I am often scrambling to find the molecular weight of this that and the other thing. And that is just the metric units!
Always makes me chuckle when somebody says Americans don\'t understand metric. We understand metric just fine, we just also happen to know a bunch of other units and know how to convert between them.
One atmosphere of pressure is 101,325 Pascals metric.
Torque is in units of Joules
So does a torque of 1 Nm do 1 joule of work in a radian of rotation?
The Ohm is events per second.
Got me on that one. How does that work?
--
Rick C.
++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
A torque wrench rotates a bolt to store energy
in the spring steel threads. A force of one Newton
with a wrench 1 meter long will store 1 Joule of
energy and heat in the bolt. The bending of the threads
is like a spring storing energy.
The Ohm is the number of events per second. An event
can be an electron hitting an atom. Each event takes
energy. More Ohms means more collisions of electrons
that lose energy.
Ohm = Volt / Ampere
Volt = Joules per Coulomb
Joules energy equals force times distance
force is mass times meter per second^2
Joule = kg meter^2 / second^2
Volt = (kg/Coulomb) * meter^2 / second^2
Ampere = Coulomb per second
Ohm = (kg/Coulomb^2) * meter^2 / second
\"Using the mass=area theory, charge is also an area.\"
Ohm = (area/area^2) * meter^2 / second
Ohm = 1 / second
http://fcgravity.blogspot.com/p/first-law-of-difffusion-of-herenowium.html
This theory has not been approved by educators.
Alan Folmsbee, MSEE
C
Clifford Heath
Guest
On 20/7/20 8:00 pm, Piotr Wyderski wrote:
It\'s the cross-section area of a long thread of fuel that you car can
use to follow without losing speed. Ours does better than 0.1mm^2 only
on the highway, approximately a 0.25mm diameter thread of fuel. That
doesn\'t seem like much.
For electric cars, the measure is newtons, the force required to
maintain velocity against drag. Even for gasoline cars, that would be
more instructive, with a separate efficiency measure for the engine.
Clifford Heath.
Ricketty C wrote:
I thought the point of SI was to unify the use of units so everyone
could speak the same language?
People cannot even agree what a ton is.
WTF?! Why have multiple units like this?
Do you express fuel consumption of cars in square meters, as it should
have always been? This is the cross-section area of the virtual stream
of fuel running along your car when you are driving. Self-normalised,
doesn\'t need any \"per 100km\".
It\'s the cross-section area of a long thread of fuel that you car can
use to follow without losing speed. Ours does better than 0.1mm^2 only
on the highway, approximately a 0.25mm diameter thread of fuel. That
doesn\'t seem like much.
For electric cars, the measure is newtons, the force required to
maintain velocity against drag. Even for gasoline cars, that would be
more instructive, with a separate efficiency measure for the engine.
Clifford Heath.
M
Martin Brown
Guest
On 20/07/2020 15:09, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
One of the UK\'s highest pressure gas pipelines is near me. But alas
there is no mains gas in the village at a domestic usable pressure.
> \"Inch\" is a funny sounding word.
By sheer coincidence it is about 20% off being an atto Parsec (~3cm).
(recommended tongue in cheek SI rule of thumb measure one April fools)
--
Regards,
Martin Brown
On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 09:39:39 +0100, Martin Brown
\'\'\'newspam\'\'\'@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
I don\'t recall ever seeing mmH2O or cmH2O before.
mBar and Torr persist in my field and there are still good textbooks in
cgs units so you have to be reasonably adept at living with a few orders
of magnitude here and there.
Part of design co-operation should be defining and enforcing the units to
reduce possible mistakes.
Likewise I\'m finding flow rates indicated as either
ml/s
SLM (standard liters per minute)
Gases are compressible and the correct unit should be g/s ;-)
Or mass flow controllers which are calibrated by amount delivered.
Around here, domestic gas pressure is measured in inches of water, or
just \"inches\", roughly six.
It used to be distributed at that pressure, but now it\'s some higher
pressure with a regulator at each house.
One of the UK\'s highest pressure gas pipelines is near me. But alas
there is no mains gas in the village at a domestic usable pressure.
> \"Inch\" is a funny sounding word.
By sheer coincidence it is about 20% off being an atto Parsec (~3cm).
(recommended tongue in cheek SI rule of thumb measure one April fools)
--
Regards,
Martin Brown
R
Ricketty C
Guest
On Tuesday, July 21, 2020 at 3:47:40 AM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
Newton is not useful since it will vary hugely over speed and only be useful to compare cars directly while saying nothing about what you really care about, cost.
What really matters is $/mile or â¬/mile, etc. Since the cost of electricity varies widely the energy per mile is useful as joules/mile or more commonly, even if not SI, kWh/mi. Of course these numbers will be related to driving patterns, but not the huge, direct impact that newtons suffer, just the same smaller effect we are used to with MPG.
A measure that would be similar to your newton number would simply be kW. This will relate more to useful units that can be used to find energy consumption and cost. I love mashing the accelerator and watching the kW meter run up to 400 in my car.
Oh yeah, my car needs 1.25 amps at 240 V to run on the highway at 60 MPH (97 kph) which will require a wire of about 20 gauge which is about 0.5 mm^2 cross section, 0.8 mm diameter.
--
Rick C.
--- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
On 20/7/20 8:00 pm, Piotr Wyderski wrote:
Ricketty C wrote:
I thought the point of SI was to unify the use of units so everyone
could speak the same language?
People cannot even agree what a ton is.
WTF?! Why have multiple units like this?
Do you express fuel consumption of cars in square meters, as it should
have always been? This is the cross-section area of the virtual stream
of fuel running along your car when you are driving. Self-normalised,
doesn\'t need any \"per 100km\".
It\'s the cross-section area of a long thread of fuel that you car can
use to follow without losing speed. Ours does better than 0.1mm^2 only
on the highway, approximately a 0.25mm diameter thread of fuel. That
doesn\'t seem like much.
For electric cars, the measure is newtons, the force required to
maintain velocity against drag. Even for gasoline cars, that would be
more instructive, with a separate efficiency measure for the engine.
Clifford Heath.
Newton is not useful since it will vary hugely over speed and only be useful to compare cars directly while saying nothing about what you really care about, cost.
What really matters is $/mile or â¬/mile, etc. Since the cost of electricity varies widely the energy per mile is useful as joules/mile or more commonly, even if not SI, kWh/mi. Of course these numbers will be related to driving patterns, but not the huge, direct impact that newtons suffer, just the same smaller effect we are used to with MPG.
A measure that would be similar to your newton number would simply be kW. This will relate more to useful units that can be used to find energy consumption and cost. I love mashing the accelerator and watching the kW meter run up to 400 in my car.
Oh yeah, my car needs 1.25 amps at 240 V to run on the highway at 60 MPH (97 kph) which will require a wire of about 20 gauge which is about 0.5 mm^2 cross section, 0.8 mm diameter.
--
Rick C.
--- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
R
Ricketty C
Guest
On Tuesday, July 21, 2020 at 3:47:40 AM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
Newton is not useful since it will vary hugely over speed and only be useful to compare cars directly while saying nothing about what you really care about, cost.
What really matters is $/mile or â¬/mile, etc. Since the cost of electricity varies widely the energy per mile is useful as joules/mile or more commonly, even if not SI, kWh/mi. Of course these numbers will be related to driving patterns, but not the huge, direct impact that newtons suffer, just the same smaller effect we are used to with MPG.
A measure that would be similar to your newton number would simply be kW. This will relate more to useful units that can be used to find energy consumption and cost. I love mashing the accelerator and watching the kW meter run up to 400 in my car.
Oh yeah, my car needs 1.25 amps at 240 V to run on the highway at 60 MPH (97 kph) which will require a wire of about 20 gauge which is about 0.5 mm^2 cross section, 0.8 mm diameter.
--
Rick C.
--- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
On 20/7/20 8:00 pm, Piotr Wyderski wrote:
Ricketty C wrote:
I thought the point of SI was to unify the use of units so everyone
could speak the same language?
People cannot even agree what a ton is.
WTF?! Why have multiple units like this?
Do you express fuel consumption of cars in square meters, as it should
have always been? This is the cross-section area of the virtual stream
of fuel running along your car when you are driving. Self-normalised,
doesn\'t need any \"per 100km\".
It\'s the cross-section area of a long thread of fuel that you car can
use to follow without losing speed. Ours does better than 0.1mm^2 only
on the highway, approximately a 0.25mm diameter thread of fuel. That
doesn\'t seem like much.
For electric cars, the measure is newtons, the force required to
maintain velocity against drag. Even for gasoline cars, that would be
more instructive, with a separate efficiency measure for the engine.
Clifford Heath.
Newton is not useful since it will vary hugely over speed and only be useful to compare cars directly while saying nothing about what you really care about, cost.
What really matters is $/mile or â¬/mile, etc. Since the cost of electricity varies widely the energy per mile is useful as joules/mile or more commonly, even if not SI, kWh/mi. Of course these numbers will be related to driving patterns, but not the huge, direct impact that newtons suffer, just the same smaller effect we are used to with MPG.
A measure that would be similar to your newton number would simply be kW. This will relate more to useful units that can be used to find energy consumption and cost. I love mashing the accelerator and watching the kW meter run up to 400 in my car.
Oh yeah, my car needs 1.25 amps at 240 V to run on the highway at 60 MPH (97 kph) which will require a wire of about 20 gauge which is about 0.5 mm^2 cross section, 0.8 mm diameter.
--
Rick C.
--- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
R
Ricketty C
Guest
On Tuesday, July 21, 2020 at 3:47:40 AM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
Newton is not useful since it will vary hugely over speed and only be useful to compare cars directly while saying nothing about what you really care about, cost.
What really matters is $/mile or â¬/mile, etc. Since the cost of electricity varies widely the energy per mile is useful as joules/mile or more commonly, even if not SI, kWh/mi. Of course these numbers will be related to driving patterns, but not the huge, direct impact that newtons suffer, just the same smaller effect we are used to with MPG.
A measure that would be similar to your newton number would simply be kW. This will relate more to useful units that can be used to find energy consumption and cost. I love mashing the accelerator and watching the kW meter run up to 400 in my car.
Oh yeah, my car needs 1.25 amps at 240 V to run on the highway at 60 MPH (97 kph) which will require a wire of about 20 gauge which is about 0.5 mm^2 cross section, 0.8 mm diameter.
--
Rick C.
--- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
On 20/7/20 8:00 pm, Piotr Wyderski wrote:
Ricketty C wrote:
I thought the point of SI was to unify the use of units so everyone
could speak the same language?
People cannot even agree what a ton is.
WTF?! Why have multiple units like this?
Do you express fuel consumption of cars in square meters, as it should
have always been? This is the cross-section area of the virtual stream
of fuel running along your car when you are driving. Self-normalised,
doesn\'t need any \"per 100km\".
It\'s the cross-section area of a long thread of fuel that you car can
use to follow without losing speed. Ours does better than 0.1mm^2 only
on the highway, approximately a 0.25mm diameter thread of fuel. That
doesn\'t seem like much.
For electric cars, the measure is newtons, the force required to
maintain velocity against drag. Even for gasoline cars, that would be
more instructive, with a separate efficiency measure for the engine.
Clifford Heath.
Newton is not useful since it will vary hugely over speed and only be useful to compare cars directly while saying nothing about what you really care about, cost.
What really matters is $/mile or â¬/mile, etc. Since the cost of electricity varies widely the energy per mile is useful as joules/mile or more commonly, even if not SI, kWh/mi. Of course these numbers will be related to driving patterns, but not the huge, direct impact that newtons suffer, just the same smaller effect we are used to with MPG.
A measure that would be similar to your newton number would simply be kW. This will relate more to useful units that can be used to find energy consumption and cost. I love mashing the accelerator and watching the kW meter run up to 400 in my car.
Oh yeah, my car needs 1.25 amps at 240 V to run on the highway at 60 MPH (97 kph) which will require a wire of about 20 gauge which is about 0.5 mm^2 cross section, 0.8 mm diameter.
--
Rick C.
--- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
L
Lasse Langwadt Christensen
Guest
tirsdag den 21. juli 2020 kl. 17.18.42 UTC+2 skrev Ricketty C:
that\'s a way off, 300W is what a decent cyclist can do
a car doing 100km/h will take something like 10-15kW
Tesla3, 75kWh battery, 500km range
75kWh/15kW = 5 hours, 5 hours * 100km/h = 500km
On Tuesday, July 21, 2020 at 3:47:40 AM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 20/7/20 8:00 pm, Piotr Wyderski wrote:
Ricketty C wrote:
I thought the point of SI was to unify the use of units so everyone
could speak the same language?
People cannot even agree what a ton is.
WTF?! Why have multiple units like this?
Do you express fuel consumption of cars in square meters, as it should
have always been? This is the cross-section area of the virtual stream
of fuel running along your car when you are driving. Self-normalised,
doesn\'t need any \"per 100km\".
It\'s the cross-section area of a long thread of fuel that you car can
use to follow without losing speed. Ours does better than 0.1mm^2 only
on the highway, approximately a 0.25mm diameter thread of fuel. That
doesn\'t seem like much.
For electric cars, the measure is newtons, the force required to
maintain velocity against drag. Even for gasoline cars, that would be
more instructive, with a separate efficiency measure for the engine.
Clifford Heath.
Newton is not useful since it will vary hugely over speed and only be useful to compare cars directly while saying nothing about what you really care about, cost.
What really matters is $/mile or â¬/mile, etc. Since the cost of electricity varies widely the energy per mile is useful as joules/mile or more commonly, even if not SI, kWh/mi. Of course these numbers will be related to driving patterns, but not the huge, direct impact that newtons suffer, just the same smaller effect we are used to with MPG.
A measure that would be similar to your newton number would simply be kW. This will relate more to useful units that can be used to find energy consumption and cost. I love mashing the accelerator and watching the kW meter run up to 400 in my car.
Oh yeah, my car needs 1.25 amps at 240 V to run on the highway at 60 MPH (97 kph) which will require a wire of about 20 gauge which is about 0.5 mm^2 cross section, 0.8 mm diameter.
that\'s a way off, 300W is what a decent cyclist can do
a car doing 100km/h will take something like 10-15kW
Tesla3, 75kWh battery, 500km range
75kWh/15kW = 5 hours, 5 hours * 100km/h = 500km
L
Lasse Langwadt Christensen
Guest
tirsdag den 21. juli 2020 kl. 17.18.42 UTC+2 skrev Ricketty C:
that\'s a way off, 300W is what a decent cyclist can do
a car doing 100km/h will take something like 10-15kW
Tesla3, 75kWh battery, 500km range
75kWh/15kW = 5 hours, 5 hours * 100km/h = 500km
On Tuesday, July 21, 2020 at 3:47:40 AM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 20/7/20 8:00 pm, Piotr Wyderski wrote:
Ricketty C wrote:
I thought the point of SI was to unify the use of units so everyone
could speak the same language?
People cannot even agree what a ton is.
WTF?! Why have multiple units like this?
Do you express fuel consumption of cars in square meters, as it should
have always been? This is the cross-section area of the virtual stream
of fuel running along your car when you are driving. Self-normalised,
doesn\'t need any \"per 100km\".
It\'s the cross-section area of a long thread of fuel that you car can
use to follow without losing speed. Ours does better than 0.1mm^2 only
on the highway, approximately a 0.25mm diameter thread of fuel. That
doesn\'t seem like much.
For electric cars, the measure is newtons, the force required to
maintain velocity against drag. Even for gasoline cars, that would be
more instructive, with a separate efficiency measure for the engine.
Clifford Heath.
Newton is not useful since it will vary hugely over speed and only be useful to compare cars directly while saying nothing about what you really care about, cost.
What really matters is $/mile or â¬/mile, etc. Since the cost of electricity varies widely the energy per mile is useful as joules/mile or more commonly, even if not SI, kWh/mi. Of course these numbers will be related to driving patterns, but not the huge, direct impact that newtons suffer, just the same smaller effect we are used to with MPG.
A measure that would be similar to your newton number would simply be kW. This will relate more to useful units that can be used to find energy consumption and cost. I love mashing the accelerator and watching the kW meter run up to 400 in my car.
Oh yeah, my car needs 1.25 amps at 240 V to run on the highway at 60 MPH (97 kph) which will require a wire of about 20 gauge which is about 0.5 mm^2 cross section, 0.8 mm diameter.
that\'s a way off, 300W is what a decent cyclist can do
a car doing 100km/h will take something like 10-15kW
Tesla3, 75kWh battery, 500km range
75kWh/15kW = 5 hours, 5 hours * 100km/h = 500km
L
Lasse Langwadt Christensen
Guest
tirsdag den 21. juli 2020 kl. 17.18.42 UTC+2 skrev Ricketty C:
that\'s a way off, 300W is what a decent cyclist can do
a car doing 100km/h will take something like 10-15kW
Tesla3, 75kWh battery, 500km range
75kWh/15kW = 5 hours, 5 hours * 100km/h = 500km
On Tuesday, July 21, 2020 at 3:47:40 AM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 20/7/20 8:00 pm, Piotr Wyderski wrote:
Ricketty C wrote:
I thought the point of SI was to unify the use of units so everyone
could speak the same language?
People cannot even agree what a ton is.
WTF?! Why have multiple units like this?
Do you express fuel consumption of cars in square meters, as it should
have always been? This is the cross-section area of the virtual stream
of fuel running along your car when you are driving. Self-normalised,
doesn\'t need any \"per 100km\".
It\'s the cross-section area of a long thread of fuel that you car can
use to follow without losing speed. Ours does better than 0.1mm^2 only
on the highway, approximately a 0.25mm diameter thread of fuel. That
doesn\'t seem like much.
For electric cars, the measure is newtons, the force required to
maintain velocity against drag. Even for gasoline cars, that would be
more instructive, with a separate efficiency measure for the engine.
Clifford Heath.
Newton is not useful since it will vary hugely over speed and only be useful to compare cars directly while saying nothing about what you really care about, cost.
What really matters is $/mile or â¬/mile, etc. Since the cost of electricity varies widely the energy per mile is useful as joules/mile or more commonly, even if not SI, kWh/mi. Of course these numbers will be related to driving patterns, but not the huge, direct impact that newtons suffer, just the same smaller effect we are used to with MPG.
A measure that would be similar to your newton number would simply be kW. This will relate more to useful units that can be used to find energy consumption and cost. I love mashing the accelerator and watching the kW meter run up to 400 in my car.
Oh yeah, my car needs 1.25 amps at 240 V to run on the highway at 60 MPH (97 kph) which will require a wire of about 20 gauge which is about 0.5 mm^2 cross section, 0.8 mm diameter.
that\'s a way off, 300W is what a decent cyclist can do
a car doing 100km/h will take something like 10-15kW
Tesla3, 75kWh battery, 500km range
75kWh/15kW = 5 hours, 5 hours * 100km/h = 500km
S
server
Guest
On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 16:09:46 +0100, Martin Brown
<\'\'\'newspam\'\'\'@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
There is an anti-methane movement here. Several cities have outlawed
gas connections to new construction, to Save The Earth somehow. They
want everything to be all electric. That\'s going to get interesting.
The old iron gas pipes in our neighborhood were rusting out, so rather
than dig up the streets and replace them they fished little yellow
plastic tubes into the old pipes, ran high pressure gas through them,
and put a regulator at every house to maintain the low pressure.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
<\'\'\'newspam\'\'\'@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
On 20/07/2020 15:09, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 09:39:39 +0100, Martin Brown
\'\'\'newspam\'\'\'@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
I don\'t recall ever seeing mmH2O or cmH2O before.
mBar and Torr persist in my field and there are still good textbooks in
cgs units so you have to be reasonably adept at living with a few orders
of magnitude here and there.
Part of design co-operation should be defining and enforcing the units to
reduce possible mistakes.
Likewise I\'m finding flow rates indicated as either
ml/s
SLM (standard liters per minute)
Gases are compressible and the correct unit should be g/s ;-)
Or mass flow controllers which are calibrated by amount delivered.
Around here, domestic gas pressure is measured in inches of water, or
just \"inches\", roughly six.
It used to be distributed at that pressure, but now it\'s some higher
pressure with a regulator at each house.
One of the UK\'s highest pressure gas pipelines is near me. But alas
there is no mains gas in the village at a domestic usable pressure.
\"Inch\" is a funny sounding word.
By sheer coincidence it is about 20% off being an atto Parsec (~3cm).
(recommended tongue in cheek SI rule of thumb measure one April fools)
There is an anti-methane movement here. Several cities have outlawed
gas connections to new construction, to Save The Earth somehow. They
want everything to be all electric. That\'s going to get interesting.
The old iron gas pipes in our neighborhood were rusting out, so rather
than dig up the streets and replace them they fished little yellow
plastic tubes into the old pipes, ran high pressure gas through them,
and put a regulator at every house to maintain the low pressure.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
S
server
Guest
On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 16:09:46 +0100, Martin Brown
<\'\'\'newspam\'\'\'@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
There is an anti-methane movement here. Several cities have outlawed
gas connections to new construction, to Save The Earth somehow. They
want everything to be all electric. That\'s going to get interesting.
The old iron gas pipes in our neighborhood were rusting out, so rather
than dig up the streets and replace them they fished little yellow
plastic tubes into the old pipes, ran high pressure gas through them,
and put a regulator at every house to maintain the low pressure.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
<\'\'\'newspam\'\'\'@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
On 20/07/2020 15:09, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 09:39:39 +0100, Martin Brown
\'\'\'newspam\'\'\'@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
I don\'t recall ever seeing mmH2O or cmH2O before.
mBar and Torr persist in my field and there are still good textbooks in
cgs units so you have to be reasonably adept at living with a few orders
of magnitude here and there.
Part of design co-operation should be defining and enforcing the units to
reduce possible mistakes.
Likewise I\'m finding flow rates indicated as either
ml/s
SLM (standard liters per minute)
Gases are compressible and the correct unit should be g/s ;-)
Or mass flow controllers which are calibrated by amount delivered.
Around here, domestic gas pressure is measured in inches of water, or
just \"inches\", roughly six.
It used to be distributed at that pressure, but now it\'s some higher
pressure with a regulator at each house.
One of the UK\'s highest pressure gas pipelines is near me. But alas
there is no mains gas in the village at a domestic usable pressure.
\"Inch\" is a funny sounding word.
By sheer coincidence it is about 20% off being an atto Parsec (~3cm).
(recommended tongue in cheek SI rule of thumb measure one April fools)
There is an anti-methane movement here. Several cities have outlawed
gas connections to new construction, to Save The Earth somehow. They
want everything to be all electric. That\'s going to get interesting.
The old iron gas pipes in our neighborhood were rusting out, so rather
than dig up the streets and replace them they fished little yellow
plastic tubes into the old pipes, ran high pressure gas through them,
and put a regulator at every house to maintain the low pressure.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
J
John Larkin
Guest
On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 18:14:10 -0700 (PDT), George Herold
<ggherold@gmail.com> wrote:
Here\'s my little units program.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/64rg7ko4rc7hhw7/U.zip?dl=0
I could add pressure, but we rarely deal with that.
<ggherold@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 5:41:38 PM UTC-4, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 12:23:22 AM UTC-6, Ricketty C wrote:
I thought the point of SI was to unify the use of units so everyone could speak the same language? On this ventilator I am find many ways of expressing the same pressure and flow rates.
Pascals
mmH2O
cmH2O
mBar
and another one I didn\'t even recognize. lol
Likewise I\'m finding flow rates indicated as either
ml/s
SLM (standard liters per minute)
WTF?! Why have multiple units like this? This is all in the same field really. People just like to use different units.
Damn them to hell!!!
--
Rick C.
- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Torque units are equally frustrating. According to SI it is supposed to be Nm. I am always converting Nm, Ncm, ft-lb, in-lb., oz-in., etc.
We are also a chemistry lab. Concentration units...grrr! This is worse. Units can be mass-per-volume or number-per-volume. Depending on the industry we are serving, the preferred units are different. It gets a bit obnoxious constantly converting mg/mL to nanomolar (for instance). Since our software analysis needs everything in molarity, I am often scrambling to find the molecular weight of this that and the other thing. And that is just the metric units!
Always makes me chuckle when somebody says Americans don\'t understand metric. We understand metric just fine, we just also happen to know a bunch of other units and know how to convert between them.
As far as I\'m concerned, getting the units right is part of the job.
My \'learning units\' story involves making an impedance line for
a helium flow cryostat. I made a factor of ten error in the pressure
(Pascals to atm. IIRC) and made the impedance x10 greater than necessary
(or wanted!)
Since the flow impedance \'recipe\' involved cramming some wire
into a thin SS tube. I wasted a lot of time making the wrong
value of flow impedance. And ~$100 1980 dollars (20 liters)
of liquid helium, discovering my mistake.
I was younger then :^)
George H.
I like ft-lbs when torquing head gaskets and such.
Here\'s my little units program.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/64rg7ko4rc7hhw7/U.zip?dl=0
I could add pressure, but we rarely deal with that.
J
John Larkin
Guest
On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 18:14:10 -0700 (PDT), George Herold
<ggherold@gmail.com> wrote:
Here\'s my little units program.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/64rg7ko4rc7hhw7/U.zip?dl=0
I could add pressure, but we rarely deal with that.
<ggherold@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 5:41:38 PM UTC-4, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 12:23:22 AM UTC-6, Ricketty C wrote:
I thought the point of SI was to unify the use of units so everyone could speak the same language? On this ventilator I am find many ways of expressing the same pressure and flow rates.
Pascals
mmH2O
cmH2O
mBar
and another one I didn\'t even recognize. lol
Likewise I\'m finding flow rates indicated as either
ml/s
SLM (standard liters per minute)
WTF?! Why have multiple units like this? This is all in the same field really. People just like to use different units.
Damn them to hell!!!
--
Rick C.
- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Torque units are equally frustrating. According to SI it is supposed to be Nm. I am always converting Nm, Ncm, ft-lb, in-lb., oz-in., etc.
We are also a chemistry lab. Concentration units...grrr! This is worse. Units can be mass-per-volume or number-per-volume. Depending on the industry we are serving, the preferred units are different. It gets a bit obnoxious constantly converting mg/mL to nanomolar (for instance). Since our software analysis needs everything in molarity, I am often scrambling to find the molecular weight of this that and the other thing. And that is just the metric units!
Always makes me chuckle when somebody says Americans don\'t understand metric. We understand metric just fine, we just also happen to know a bunch of other units and know how to convert between them.
As far as I\'m concerned, getting the units right is part of the job.
My \'learning units\' story involves making an impedance line for
a helium flow cryostat. I made a factor of ten error in the pressure
(Pascals to atm. IIRC) and made the impedance x10 greater than necessary
(or wanted!)
Since the flow impedance \'recipe\' involved cramming some wire
into a thin SS tube. I wasted a lot of time making the wrong
value of flow impedance. And ~$100 1980 dollars (20 liters)
of liquid helium, discovering my mistake.
I was younger then :^)
George H.
I like ft-lbs when torquing head gaskets and such.
Here\'s my little units program.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/64rg7ko4rc7hhw7/U.zip?dl=0
I could add pressure, but we rarely deal with that.
J
John Larkin
Guest
On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 18:14:10 -0700 (PDT), George Herold
<ggherold@gmail.com> wrote:
Here\'s my little units program.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/64rg7ko4rc7hhw7/U.zip?dl=0
I could add pressure, but we rarely deal with that.
<ggherold@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 5:41:38 PM UTC-4, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 12:23:22 AM UTC-6, Ricketty C wrote:
I thought the point of SI was to unify the use of units so everyone could speak the same language? On this ventilator I am find many ways of expressing the same pressure and flow rates.
Pascals
mmH2O
cmH2O
mBar
and another one I didn\'t even recognize. lol
Likewise I\'m finding flow rates indicated as either
ml/s
SLM (standard liters per minute)
WTF?! Why have multiple units like this? This is all in the same field really. People just like to use different units.
Damn them to hell!!!
--
Rick C.
- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Torque units are equally frustrating. According to SI it is supposed to be Nm. I am always converting Nm, Ncm, ft-lb, in-lb., oz-in., etc.
We are also a chemistry lab. Concentration units...grrr! This is worse. Units can be mass-per-volume or number-per-volume. Depending on the industry we are serving, the preferred units are different. It gets a bit obnoxious constantly converting mg/mL to nanomolar (for instance). Since our software analysis needs everything in molarity, I am often scrambling to find the molecular weight of this that and the other thing. And that is just the metric units!
Always makes me chuckle when somebody says Americans don\'t understand metric. We understand metric just fine, we just also happen to know a bunch of other units and know how to convert between them.
As far as I\'m concerned, getting the units right is part of the job.
My \'learning units\' story involves making an impedance line for
a helium flow cryostat. I made a factor of ten error in the pressure
(Pascals to atm. IIRC) and made the impedance x10 greater than necessary
(or wanted!)
Since the flow impedance \'recipe\' involved cramming some wire
into a thin SS tube. I wasted a lot of time making the wrong
value of flow impedance. And ~$100 1980 dollars (20 liters)
of liquid helium, discovering my mistake.
I was younger then :^)
George H.
I like ft-lbs when torquing head gaskets and such.
Here\'s my little units program.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/64rg7ko4rc7hhw7/U.zip?dl=0
I could add pressure, but we rarely deal with that.
L
Lasse Langwadt Christensen
Guest
tirsdag den 21. juli 2020 kl. 20.53.55 UTC+2 skrev John Larkin:
or just type it into google, the google calculator handle most units
On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 18:14:10 -0700 (PDT), George Herold
ggherold@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 5:41:38 PM UTC-4, DemonicTubes wrote:
On Monday, July 20, 2020 at 12:23:22 AM UTC-6, Ricketty C wrote:
I thought the point of SI was to unify the use of units so everyone could speak the same language? On this ventilator I am find many ways of expressing the same pressure and flow rates.
Pascals
mmH2O
cmH2O
mBar
and another one I didn\'t even recognize. lol
Likewise I\'m finding flow rates indicated as either
ml/s
SLM (standard liters per minute)
WTF?! Why have multiple units like this? This is all in the same field really. People just like to use different units.
Damn them to hell!!!
--
Rick C.
- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Torque units are equally frustrating. According to SI it is supposed to be Nm. I am always converting Nm, Ncm, ft-lb, in-lb., oz-in., etc.
We are also a chemistry lab. Concentration units...grrr! This is worse. Units can be mass-per-volume or number-per-volume. Depending on the industry we are serving, the preferred units are different. It gets a bit obnoxious constantly converting mg/mL to nanomolar (for instance). Since our software analysis needs everything in molarity, I am often scrambling to find the molecular weight of this that and the other thing. And that is just the metric units!
Always makes me chuckle when somebody says Americans don\'t understand metric. We understand metric just fine, we just also happen to know a bunch of other units and know how to convert between them.
As far as I\'m concerned, getting the units right is part of the job.
My \'learning units\' story involves making an impedance line for
a helium flow cryostat. I made a factor of ten error in the pressure
(Pascals to atm. IIRC) and made the impedance x10 greater than necessary
(or wanted!)
Since the flow impedance \'recipe\' involved cramming some wire
into a thin SS tube. I wasted a lot of time making the wrong
value of flow impedance. And ~$100 1980 dollars (20 liters)
of liquid helium, discovering my mistake.
I was younger then :^)
George H.
I like ft-lbs when torquing head gaskets and such.
Here\'s my little units program.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/64rg7ko4rc7hhw7/U.zip?dl=0
I could add pressure, but we rarely deal with that.
or just type it into google, the google calculator handle most units