Language:
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

Many thanks.

New Book

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

• Total Posts: 521866
• Total Topics: 15551
• Online Today: 44
• Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
• Users: 7
• Guests: 11
• Total: 18

Author Topic: W = M*D/T  (Read 10514 times)

johnny874

• Hero Member
• Posts: 958
W = M*D/T
« on: June 16, 2012, 03:38:23 PM »
In considering the current explanation of work and it's relationship to energy, it seems that time is not a consideration.
While they give examples of how to calculate how much work is performed under specific conditions, it seems that if
a mass (1kg) is moved 9.8M in one second, then it would be the equivalent of 9.8N^2 or 96.04 Newtons of work. And if
the same 1kg of mass were moved in .5 (1/2) seconds, then it would be 1kg*9.8M/.5 = 192.08 Newtons of force.
It seems considering something like this helps to understand the energy requirements of a system or how much energy
could be expected to be derived from a system. This is something I have thought of while working on Bessler's Wheel.
The basic idea is if a weight drops a distance we will call x and I want to move water a distance y and in a certain amount
of time, t, then how much energy does x require to operate the system ?
In a sense, this is bringing science into engineering because mass and velocity are taken into consideration.

John
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_(physics)

edited to correct spelling and add that a 1kg weight has 9.8N(Newtons) of force, gravity's effect on it (why it has mass).
So if you consider that xy/t = work or it's equivalent energy in Newtons. Of course, md/t would be what everyone would understand.

« Last Edit: June 16, 2012, 05:31:21 PM by johnny874 »

W = M*D/T
« on: June 16, 2012, 03:38:23 PM »

johnny874

• Hero Member
• Posts: 958
Re: W = M*D/T
« Reply #1 on: June 16, 2012, 05:40:32 PM »
@All,
In a sense, I have combined Newton's work with gravity and force and found a way that they
might work better with engineering. This would be by considering force in Newtons and relating
work to 1 second of gravity. It would be a basic standard that could possibly be more easily
applied to engineering than needing to convert Joules to understand how much energy a system
has, needs or can have extracted from it.

Jim

johnny874

• Hero Member
• Posts: 958
Re: W = M*D/T
« Reply #2 on: June 16, 2012, 06:52:12 PM »
Last post for the day on this, okay ?
What I now realize is that 1N/w or Newton of work is 1kg*9.8m/1s = 96.04 Newtons of Force.
This is a basic standard which could be applied to many things. for example, 1N of air is about 3.6 psi.
This is because 1kg/9.8 = .102. When converted to SAE it is the equivalent of 3.6 psi. Neat, huh ?
102 g = 3.59794 oz
http://www.metric-conversions.org/weight/ounces-conversion.htm

A simple way to discuss any idea using common values. What this allows for is being able to understand when
the amount of work that can be expected from a system. And if it is not realized, then it could be asked if it is
entropy, 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, resistance or proper flow has not been established. It does allow for
establishing a guideline based on accepted principles in science by using a standard valuation for force or energy
in an engineered system.

Bon Appetite
Jim

Something to consider, if 36 psi (liquid or gas) is acting on a piston with a surface area of 10^2", then it has a total value of 360.
If this value is divided by 3.6, then the answer is 100 newtons. This force would be equal to a 1kg weight moving
at 9.8m/s. Okay, there would be 3.96newtons left over

Re: W = M*D/T
« Reply #2 on: June 16, 2012, 06:52:12 PM »

MileHigh

• Hero Member
• Posts: 7600
Re: W = M*D/T
« Reply #3 on: June 16, 2012, 07:18:53 PM »

johnny874

• Hero Member
• Posts: 958
Re: W = M*D/T
« Reply #4 on: June 16, 2012, 07:38:32 PM »

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hph.html#mechcon

Hi Milehigh,
I think for this section of the forum, that might be a bit more than what people want.
Most of the values we work with are for bodies (mass) moving slower than 9.8m/s.
The link seems to be for those people who can relate to 300,000 kph (speed of light/magnetic behavior)
as a basis for their observations.

Jim

Re: W = M*D/T
« Reply #4 on: June 16, 2012, 07:38:32 PM »

johnny874

• Hero Member
• Posts: 958
Re: W = M*D/T
« Reply #5 on: June 16, 2012, 07:55:37 PM »
@All,
I made a mistake converting grams.
3.6 psi is actually ounces.
There about 4.44 newtons per 1psi.

Jim

johnny874

• Hero Member
• Posts: 958
Re: W = M*D/T
« Reply #6 on: June 17, 2012, 01:06:49 AM »
@Milehigh,
something to think about, electrons and photons behave? little mass but r quite fast.
it seems slower moving bodies have more mass, it may have something to do with plasma physics,

jim
« Last Edit: June 17, 2012, 03:14:32 AM by johnny874 »

Re: W = M*D/T
« Reply #6 on: June 17, 2012, 01:06:49 AM »

johnny874

• Hero Member
• Posts: 958
Re: W = M*D/T
« Reply #7 on: June 17, 2012, 02:10:25 AM »
aw c,mon people,
you haven,t studied physics ?
« Last Edit: June 17, 2012, 03:12:06 AM by johnny874 »

MileHigh

• Hero Member
• Posts: 7600
Re: W = M*D/T
« Reply #8 on: June 17, 2012, 03:38:55 AM »
Jim:

I gave you a link to the Hyperphysics web site because I could see that your units were incorrect.  It's not about relativistic speed effects and all that stuff.

For example, the unit of work is a Newton of force times one meter of displacement, a Newton-meter.  (They want you to say "Joule" because Newton-meter is used for torque.)

So a Newton is equal to a kg*m/s^2.  So one Joule is a kg*m^2/s^2.

MileHigh

Re: W = M*D/T
« Reply #8 on: June 17, 2012, 03:38:55 AM »

johnny874

• Hero Member
• Posts: 958
Re: W = M*D/T
« Reply #9 on: June 17, 2012, 04:36:17 AM »
Hi Milehigh,
I am glad you posted. I wish more people were willing to discuss things.
With what I posted, it was more for mechanical engineering.
As for Joules, it is like you said, mass is squared. I think this added step increases the level of difficulty.
Stefan has asked that things be put in terms anyone can understand.
In a way, he is asking someone like you to become a teacher.

Jim

johnny874

• Hero Member
• Posts: 958
Re: W = M*D/T
« Reply #10 on: June 17, 2012, 05:49:06 AM »
@All,
Milehigh is someome you can probably relate to. He is smart. The only thing I did was to consider that it takes time to perform work.

Re: W = M*D/T
« Reply #10 on: June 17, 2012, 05:49:06 AM »

johnny874

• Hero Member
• Posts: 958
Re: W = M*D/T
« Reply #11 on: June 19, 2012, 03:24:54 AM »
Milehigh,
one reason why I started this thread is because gravity governs what we do.
With joules, I think it is better for calculating the mass of an element going through a mass spectrometer or the charge of an electron dependent on Heisenbergs Uncertainty Principle.
I have opened a few books over the years.
In here, I think Stefan was right when he asked that things be put in laymans terms.
With the math, I was trying to simplify it as much as porrible.
I hop ynu understand.

Jim
« Last Edit: June 19, 2012, 05:11:33 AM by johnny874 »