Horse power

[Ocean1]

So now International Standards use the Watt as the unit of work produced - whether it's light bulb,steam generator,traction engine,fuel dragster.....or a DT230.

That's mah Man!

There's even half a dozen flavours of HP, all developed by different industries to suit their own ends, all subtly different.

Kilowatts are harder to abuse, but some manufacturers seem to manage that too.

[Fooman]

Yes. The theory is immaculate.

Now take your GS125, gear it however you like, arrange perfect traction and compare how much mass it can move in a minute compared to a TE-20 Massey Ferguson.

The maximum rate of moving (i.e. speed) of a unit mass against some load (e.g. friction or gravity), assuming perfect traction and 100% efficiency of power transmission would be about 2:1 in favour of the MF, based on the assumption of the bucket making 10 hp.

That assumption is pretty far fetched, as currently the GS125 motor is in bits awaiting removal of a valve from a piston and sleeving of the cam bearings in the new head.

But a 20 hp motor is a 20 hp motor, regardless of the speed at which it makes it power. A 20 hp motor with peak power at 2000 rpm has the same capacity as a 20 hp motor which peaks at 10 000 rpm. How the speed of that power is changed by gearing etc for the final application will change the loading characteristics at the application (be it thrust through a contact patch or powering a conveyor), but it won't change the ultimate capacity of the motors to do the amount of work in a set time. Knowing this is extraordinarily useful in engineering applications!

What you probably mean is that the MF has power available at low speeds. It has, due to to having high torque at low rpm. But to get high power, it would need to run faster. How many tractors have a 10 000 rpm rev limit?

Cheers,
FM

[The Stranger:Me]

depends on what the base line is based on dude...on a inertia dyno changing the rear wheel to a lite weight wheel will yeild increased horse power. as will low weight chains and sprokets...so what is it your tuning off those results??

Sure it isn't changing engine HP, however, one assumes that changing to a lighter weight wheel yields a benefit none the less (else why do it). If a lighter weight wheel reduces rotating mass it may well be reducing HP loss in the drive chain. Surely measuring that benefit is potentially of some use i.e. it is handy to be able to quantify a change at times, and just try convincing someone else that your bum dyno is accurate.

[Fooman]

Yes,it is a contrived unit - calculated from the torque value as in my formula.....that was how horsepower was measured until the computer came along.There was never a dyno that measured HP,they all measured torque...and HP is contrived from torque and speed - it's a rate of work....how much wood could a woodchuck chuck.By using software the choice of pit pony or clydesdale is up to the programmer.

Yup, "Horsepower" as defined by Watt is a contrived unit - something like 550 lbs lifted in 1 ft in 1 second if I recall correctly.

But power, regardless of the units used to describe it, it not contrived - the rate of energy consumption or production. If there is no rate of production/consumption - there is no power, and no work can be done - which suggests that web-browsing is in-fact a state of no power...

FM,
getting back to work...

[DMNTD:Me]

Torque, however, is a real unit, and I think it's more indicative of real-world use.

Spoken like the true V Twin owner

[Pwalo]

I don't care what it is I just want more of it. (Well I would, cos I ride a Suzuki).

[Ocean1]

Spoken like the true V Twin owner

I do like my Massey Ferguson.

[Pancakes]

The maximum rate of moving (i.e. speed) of a unit mass against some load (e.g. friction or gravity), assuming perfect traction and 100% efficiency of power transmission would be about 2:1 in favour of the MF, based on the assumption of the bucket making 10 hp.

That assumption is pretty far fetched, as currently the GS125 motor is in bits awaiting removal of a valve from a piston and sleeving of the cam bearings in the new head.

But a 20 hp motor is a 20 hp motor, regardless of the speed at which it makes it power. A 20 hp motor with peak power at 2000 rpm has the same capacity as a 20 hp motor which peaks at 10 000 rpm. How the speed of that power is changed by gearing etc for the final application will change the loading characteristics at the application (be it thrust through a contact patch or powering a conveyor), but it won't change the ultimate capacity of the motors to do the amount of work in a set time. Knowing this is extraordinarily useful in engineering applications!

What you probably mean is that the MF has power available at low speeds. It has, due to to having high torque at low rpm. But to get high power, it would need to run faster. How many tractors have a 10 000 rpm rev limit?

Cheers,
FM

I assume you mean capacity for work/effort not motor size?


and here's the tractor!


PS, Revs are a great way of making power but I personally love the slow rev - fast pickup of a vehicle with more torque that HP! Who let me drive that turbo V8! mmmmmm,

[Fooman]

I assume you mean capacity for work/effort not motor size?

Er, yup, my bad engrish

FM

[Ocean1]

Spoken like the true V Twin owner

You've changed your avatar, thank fook fer that.

What you probably mean is that...

I's not very articil… artiucill … clever at saying shit.

But this guy’s not bad: http://www.msgroup.org/Tip.aspx?Num=221

And someone recently sent me this: http://www.superbikeplanet.com/2007/Dec/071217b.htm
Which helps explain some of the mechanisms which alter power delivery characteristics. Astonishingly, riders have known this for fekin ages.