Horsepower vs Torque thread
02-06-2002, 10:42 AM
#101
FormerVendor
Re: Horsepower vs Torque thread NAsty,
I've had this discussion before and half the peole in it usually don't even know the first thing about even simple classical physics so don't let it bother you too much! Of course while Tq has units that inlude a force and a length, the length is only a direction of the force or a Vector description as you already pointed out. The ft-lbs only tell use the magnitude and direction of this twisting force and not any work value. I've been through that before with RamairJP. The truly terrifying thing is that several engineers I've talked to even thought this !!!!!!
I guess those were the guys making Cs in those classes that got passed because of the curve! There's just no excuse for an educated person not to understand this stuff when they supposedly have a degree that includes it. <img src="gr_sad.gif" border="0">
HP is all that matters. It's a descriptor incorporating all the relevant elements into one number and can tell you everything you need to know. Tq and RPM are components and by themselves tell you nothing. Together they tell you hp!
I've had this discussion before and half the peole in it usually don't even know the first thing about even simple classical physics so don't let it bother you too much! Of course while Tq has units that inlude a force and a length, the length is only a direction of the force or a Vector description as you already pointed out. The ft-lbs only tell use the magnitude and direction of this twisting force and not any work value. I've been through that before with RamairJP. The truly terrifying thing is that several engineers I've talked to even thought this !!!!!!
I guess those were the guys making Cs in those classes that got passed because of the curve! There's just no excuse for an educated person not to understand this stuff when they supposedly have a degree that includes it. <img src="gr_sad.gif" border="0">
HP is all that matters. It's a descriptor incorporating all the relevant elements into one number and can tell you everything you need to know. Tq and RPM are components and by themselves tell you nothing. Together they tell you hp!
02-06-2002, 11:24 AM
#102
TECH Senior Member
Re: Horsepower vs Torque thread "HP is all that matters. It's a descriptor incorporating all the relevant elements into one number and can tell you everything you need to know. Tq and RPM are components and by themselves tell you nothing. Together they tell you hp!"
That was a VERY accurate and concise explanation of what I and others have been trying to say. Thank you. <img src="gr_images/icons/cool.gif" border="0">
That was a VERY accurate and concise explanation of what I and others have been trying to say. Thank you. <img src="gr_images/icons/cool.gif" border="0">
02-06-2002, 11:28 AM
#103
Re: Horsepower vs Torque thread [quote]Originally posted by Colonel:
<strong>"HP is all that matters. It's a descriptor incorporating all the relevant elements into one number and can tell you everything you need to know. Tq and RPM are components and by themselves tell you nothing. Together they tell you hp!"
That was a VERY accurate and concise explanation of what I and others have been trying to say. Thank you. <img src="gr_images/icons/cool.gif" border="0"> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Ditto that! <img src="graemlins/gr_judge.gif" border="0" alt="[judgement]" />
<strong>"HP is all that matters. It's a descriptor incorporating all the relevant elements into one number and can tell you everything you need to know. Tq and RPM are components and by themselves tell you nothing. Together they tell you hp!"
That was a VERY accurate and concise explanation of what I and others have been trying to say. Thank you. <img src="gr_images/icons/cool.gif" border="0"> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Ditto that! <img src="graemlins/gr_judge.gif" border="0" alt="[judgement]" />
02-06-2002, 11:53 AM
#104
Teching In
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: H O U S T O N
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Horsepower vs Torque thread This debate sounds to me like "who makes the baby? the egg from the mother or the sperm from the father."
Both are equally important, but according to the laws of this land, the sperm actually only compliments the egg <img src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" border="0"> kinda like torque complimenting horsepower <img src="graemlins/fluffy.gif" border="0" alt="[Fluffy]" /> <img src="graemlins/fluffy.gif" border="0" alt="[Fluffy]" /> <img src="graemlins/gr_zzz.gif" border="0" alt="[boring]" />
[ February 06, 2002: Message edited by: KPONTI ]</p>
Both are equally important, but according to the laws of this land, the sperm actually only compliments the egg <img src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" border="0"> kinda like torque complimenting horsepower <img src="graemlins/fluffy.gif" border="0" alt="[Fluffy]" /> <img src="graemlins/fluffy.gif" border="0" alt="[Fluffy]" /> <img src="graemlins/gr_zzz.gif" border="0" alt="[boring]" />
[ February 06, 2002: Message edited by: KPONTI ]</p>
02-06-2002, 01:28 PM
#105
TECH Addict
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: College Station, Tx
Posts: 2,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Horsepower vs Torque thread [quote]Originally posted by BigBake:
<strong> At no point did you state that I could only use torque and weight. Maybe you need a class in writing and interpretation. <hr></blockquote></strong>
"tell me what the estimate ET/MPH would be for a car, say 3000lbs, making an average of 300 ft-lbs of torque down the track."
Above is a quote from my challenge. When I said using weight, average torque, and distance "down the track" - well that is what I meant. I apologize if you thought that included RPM, but I think now it's clear that it doesn't include rpm, okay?
The point was to prove you needed torque and rpm. Which is horsepower. You yourself agree you need both of them, so I don't understand why you still think torque is what matters. Which statement do you disagree with.
1) You need torque & rpm or horsepower to solve the above problem
2) Incorporating torque and rpm is the same thing as using hp directly
I would also appreciate it if you could refrain from the ad hominem attacks - we are arguing horsepower and torque here - there shouldn't be any need for you to attack me nor my writing skills (or supposted lack therof).
[quote]As far as RPM being used, well that is simple, provided that we are on a site that has pages of dyno sheets of LS1's.<hr></blockquote>
What relevance does this have to hp vs torque. I didn't say you coldn't find the rpm, I said you couldn't use them because of the 2 contentions above.
[quote]I don't care what your ideal system is, because I use this everyday in my job. By the way, a click type torque wrench is not as accurate as a dial or digital.<hr></blockquote>
Look, take a step back and look at what you are saying. Think about this from a physics perspective for a moment. We are talking about work done on the nut here. If the nut doesn't turn, no work is done. End of story. It doesn't matter if the torque wrench, or whatever you use flexes, because we are not worried about that - we are only talking about work done to the nut. It was an example of how torque could be applied without doing work (to the nut).
[quote]This same principle is used to give aircraft torque readings. We measure deflection from a fixed magnet on the drive shaft and use a electromagnetic pick up sensor to relay the siganl to an indicator. So it an applied ideal that is patented, may not be your ideal but apparently someone else thinks the same way I do, no matter how perverse you may think.<hr></blockquote>
I really don't understand what the point of this is? I agree with you 100% you will have some sort of deflection through whatever you use to apply the torque - but that doesn't matter, because we are looking at the nut. Try taking a step back and looking at this from a different perspective - what you are saying about torque wrenches, etc. is correct, it just isn't topical.
[quote]<strong>Plus it is not theory, it is applied science, not something quoted out of a book, and then regurgitated by someone else, to make them look like they know what they are talking about.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Again, this isn't some witch hunt to make you look bad, and I assure you that isn't an over-riding motivation for me anyway. You need to calm down and look at this problem from a different viepoint, as I have said above.
[quote]This debate sounds to me like "who makes the baby? the egg from the mother or the sperm from the father."
Both are equally important, but according to the laws of this land, the sperm actually only compliments the egg kinda like torque complimenting horsepower<hr></blockquote>
Nope, When talking about potential to accelerate horsepower is *all* that matters. It is made up of torque and rpm, yes, but the magnitude of those components are irrelevant. - It's not a case of "whichever you prefer" you simply have to have a value of power in whatever form to solve the problem.
Chris
[ February 06, 2002: Message edited by: ChrisB ]</p>
<strong> At no point did you state that I could only use torque and weight. Maybe you need a class in writing and interpretation. <hr></blockquote></strong>
"tell me what the estimate ET/MPH would be for a car, say 3000lbs, making an average of 300 ft-lbs of torque down the track."
Above is a quote from my challenge. When I said using weight, average torque, and distance "down the track" - well that is what I meant. I apologize if you thought that included RPM, but I think now it's clear that it doesn't include rpm, okay?
The point was to prove you needed torque and rpm. Which is horsepower. You yourself agree you need both of them, so I don't understand why you still think torque is what matters. Which statement do you disagree with.
1) You need torque & rpm or horsepower to solve the above problem
2) Incorporating torque and rpm is the same thing as using hp directly
I would also appreciate it if you could refrain from the ad hominem attacks - we are arguing horsepower and torque here - there shouldn't be any need for you to attack me nor my writing skills (or supposted lack therof).
[quote]As far as RPM being used, well that is simple, provided that we are on a site that has pages of dyno sheets of LS1's.<hr></blockquote>
What relevance does this have to hp vs torque. I didn't say you coldn't find the rpm, I said you couldn't use them because of the 2 contentions above.
[quote]I don't care what your ideal system is, because I use this everyday in my job. By the way, a click type torque wrench is not as accurate as a dial or digital.<hr></blockquote>
Look, take a step back and look at what you are saying. Think about this from a physics perspective for a moment. We are talking about work done on the nut here. If the nut doesn't turn, no work is done. End of story. It doesn't matter if the torque wrench, or whatever you use flexes, because we are not worried about that - we are only talking about work done to the nut. It was an example of how torque could be applied without doing work (to the nut).
[quote]This same principle is used to give aircraft torque readings. We measure deflection from a fixed magnet on the drive shaft and use a electromagnetic pick up sensor to relay the siganl to an indicator. So it an applied ideal that is patented, may not be your ideal but apparently someone else thinks the same way I do, no matter how perverse you may think.<hr></blockquote>
I really don't understand what the point of this is? I agree with you 100% you will have some sort of deflection through whatever you use to apply the torque - but that doesn't matter, because we are looking at the nut. Try taking a step back and looking at this from a different perspective - what you are saying about torque wrenches, etc. is correct, it just isn't topical.
[quote]<strong>Plus it is not theory, it is applied science, not something quoted out of a book, and then regurgitated by someone else, to make them look like they know what they are talking about.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Again, this isn't some witch hunt to make you look bad, and I assure you that isn't an over-riding motivation for me anyway. You need to calm down and look at this problem from a different viepoint, as I have said above.
[quote]This debate sounds to me like "who makes the baby? the egg from the mother or the sperm from the father."
Both are equally important, but according to the laws of this land, the sperm actually only compliments the egg kinda like torque complimenting horsepower<hr></blockquote>
Nope, When talking about potential to accelerate horsepower is *all* that matters. It is made up of torque and rpm, yes, but the magnitude of those components are irrelevant. - It's not a case of "whichever you prefer" you simply have to have a value of power in whatever form to solve the problem.
Chris
[ February 06, 2002: Message edited by: ChrisB ]</p>
02-06-2002, 02:02 PM
#106
Re: Horsepower vs Torque thread It's apparent that no matter how much you try to explain something to stubborn people that your effort is not worth it. I know what I'm saying, Colonel, ChrisB, racer7088 and a FEW other is saying is correct based on Newtonian mechanics and that this is what governs us as is anyway. Following Colonel's lead, I'm stepping out of this topic. It's a waste of time trying to explain to those unwilling to listen.
Later fellas <img src="graemlins/gr_cheers.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />
Later fellas <img src="graemlins/gr_cheers.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />
