Instead of permanently mangling yourself, figure out why you think you 'need' a tattoo or other body modifications. You'll probably be happier in the long run without it.
Kudos on choosing not to drink. I'm 38, and have never taked a drink in my life. I realized young that if I were to start drinking, I'd most likely end up in a gutter, face down. I never missed out on high school or college drinking games - I chose other ways of having fun and staying in control. Anyone who thought less of me for not drinking was not worth my time; obviously their world was twisted by the shallow, self-destructive culture of alcohol. I found plenty of friends that respected my decision and didn't try to make me drink to "fit in" to their fragile "I'm cool 'cause I drink" view of their own self-worth.
To a point, I agree. But those X-15 and other rocket-propelled planes were testbeds for engines, fuels, materials, aerodynamic models like laminar flow, etc. A whole heck of a lot of research that was done trying to fly fast horizontally directly translates into trying to fly fast vertically.
I'd say launching rockets has a whole bunch to do with flight.
You're assuming that the poor fish can see the blade coming in time to get out of the way - this is the north atlantic we're talking about. The fish wuold be lucky to see it 3 feet away.
Re:No more car tinkering...
on
42-Volt Autos
·
· Score: 1
All true. The difference in open vs shorted voltages for a real battery is caused by internal resistance. That's also the reason for it boiling the electrolyte! In your example, if the battery's short-circuit current is 500A and terminal voltage is 1V, the internal resistance would be 0.022 Ohm. The power dissipated by the battery would be 5500 Watts - the same power as a household electric water heater element.
There is a difference. To get 1200W out of a 12V inverter, it would draw 100A - as much as your starter motor and require wire the diameter of your little finger. At 36V, it would only draw 33.3A, just doable with number 10 wire - the diameter of thick spaghetti. Wire current carrying capacity is proportional to the _current_, not the voltage, so you can use much smaller wire and deliver the same power to the load (power being volts * amps).
Additionally, the active devices in that inverter (typically MOSFETs) are being asked to switch 100A - MOSFETs are much happier switching higher voltage/lower current than old bipolar devices. This will boost efficiency.
Re:42V will result in more dead electrical devices
on
42-Volt Autos
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
You're right. The 78xx series are only good to about 36V or so. Unfortunately they are linear devices, and dissipate a fair amount of heat when doing their thing. I would rather see small switching supplies used anyway from an efficiency standpoint, like these or the Panasonic ones at the bottom of this page.
Re:More environmentally friendly
on
42-Volt Autos
·
· Score: 1
2003 Mini Cooper S - electrically-driven steering pump. Woo Hoo!
Re:Changing Voltage CHanges nothing
on
42-Volt Autos
·
· Score: 1
If manufactures would wire their batteries in series instead of parallel, they would have incredibly high voltages, which essentially means free power, and electric cars could run much longer with much smaller batteries.
My bother's Prius has a 270V battery pack - a whole boatload of normal cells in series, just as you said.
Some do. The computer in my 2003 Mini Cooper S stages stuff coming on, including the nav system, interior fan and AC compressor. It's nice on the motor to get up to speed before nailing it with the compressor and alternator loads.
Re:For those unfortunate times...
on
42-Volt Autos
·
· Score: 1
My brother has one of these. He was tickled pink to get 50 mpg tooling around Portland w/ the AC on.
It sounds like you guys need a 270 to 12V switching converter. It shouldn't be too hard to design one that'll put out 20-30 Amps at 14V, which would be enough to charge your 12V battery (or start the engine, for that matter).
I also suggest installing a pull-start cord under the hood, just in case.
I would like to see SUV's treated as passenger vehicles and not trucks. They would then have to abide by the same safety criteria small cars do. Currently, they do not.
As far as banning SUV's, state and federal governments already decide what you can and cannot drive (state inspections, etc). I don't _personally_ want to decide what you drive, but if your huge SUV is a hazard to others on the road (which it is), then the appropriate governing body needs to review whether or not that risk is offset by your desire to drive such a behemoth.
I think every road should be an HOV lane based on vehicle weight/passenger weight - you should be allowed about 3000 lb of vehicle for the first passenger and 750 for each passenger thereafter.
I'm no greenie, but if people are serious about cleaning up the environment and lessening our reliance on fossil and/or foreign energy sources, things like this will be the norm, not the exception.
PS: Mini's weigh about 2570lbs dry, and are as tall and wide as my wife's 2000 Mitsu Galant. It's two feet shorter, though;-)
I'm sure they've thought of it, but no new oil flow design can fully eliminate the effects of these two diametrically opposed issues. Either you want the oil to stay on the moving parts for startup, or you want it off of the moving parts quickly to avoid the crunchy effect. Using synthetic oil in very light grades (0w-20, 5w-30, etc) helps mitigate either problem, but does not solve them.
Additionally, each start cycle introduces raw gas into the cylinder that may not be consumed. Some of this gas gets past the rings, and will wash the oil from the inside of the cylinder (diluting the oil in the process).
Starting your car is the worst thing you can do to it - additional wear, thermal cycling of metal parts, etc. More start/stops means shorter life for a particular engine.
By your description, you seem like one of the few on the road that actually _use_ your SUV more than 10% of the time.
You know, I think I'd like to see vehicles that large be banned from being owned by the general public. If you need one to pull a boat, trailer, etc, have them easily available to rent when needed.
Of course, I'm biased - I drive a 2003 Mini Cooper S;-)
Variable valve timing is one of the major reasons for the push to get 48V batteries in cars. You could eliminate the whole camshaft, timing (chain | belt), and the (lifters & rockers) | (pushrods). Quite a savings in moving, lubricated parts, and adds the ability to control that last variable in the computer-controlled combustion equation.
Of course the savings in copper would be significant, too. Remember that:
voltage drop across a conductor is proportional to the current, not the voltage (V=IR)
the power delivered to the load is the product of voltage and current (P=IV)
the _power_ carrying capacity of a wire is limited by the current, not the voltage
The lowest loss way to deliver power is with high voltage and low current thru a small wire, not high current/low voltage thru a huge wire as is done now.
I would guess the much higher number of start/stop cycles on the engine would account for more wear than the higher percentage of max power. Depending on how long the engine is off (at a stoplight, say), the engine oil will drain back down into the pan, causing slightly more wear when the engine is restarted. Also, any oil left clinging to the otherwise lubricated and cooled engine parts will not be circulating and will quickly bake into a crackly crunch thanks to heat soak.
Not necessarly strange; it has been common in human cultures to associate eating something with assimilating the attributes of the eaten, or desirables attributes associated to the eaten.
It apparently applies to Martian cultures, too. They call it "Grokking".
I didn't say I didn't respect their integrity, I said I didn't trust them to always follow every rule exactly. Someone who disregards a rule usually does it because they don't think the rule is valid, and it just "gets in the way". By breaking the rule, they think they're making their job easier, and possibly doing the company a favor. There is no malice involved, only ignorance. I trust employees are human, and make bad judgement calls; therefore I try to plan for it when it happens.
The public, on the other hand, has plenty of malice and destructive intent. I don't trust them with my data as far as I can throw 'em.
What's with the "Older Stuff" link not working anymore? It gives the same stuff you're already looking at. If you change the issue number back a day (from the 6th to the 5th, lets say) it works, but gives you the stuff for the 6th!
The fallacy in your argument, IMHO, is that you seem to view trust as a black or white issue. I may not trust my employees, but I trust the public a whole heckuva lot less.
Slashdot Mirror
to compensate for what perceived inadequacy?
Instead of permanently mangling yourself, figure out why you think you 'need' a tattoo or other body modifications. You'll probably be happier in the long run without it.
IANSF (I am not Sigmund Freud)
Kudos on choosing not to drink. I'm 38, and have never taked a drink in my life. I realized young that if I were to start drinking, I'd most likely end up in a gutter, face down. I never missed out on high school or college drinking games - I chose other ways of having fun and staying in control. Anyone who thought less of me for not drinking was not worth my time; obviously their world was twisted by the shallow, self-destructive culture of alcohol. I found plenty of friends that respected my decision and didn't try to make me drink to "fit in" to their fragile "I'm cool 'cause I drink" view of their own self-worth.
To a point, I agree. But those X-15 and other rocket-propelled planes were testbeds for engines, fuels, materials, aerodynamic models like laminar flow, etc. A whole heck of a lot of research that was done trying to fly fast horizontally directly translates into trying to fly fast vertically.
I'd say launching rockets has a whole bunch to do with flight.
Oh, you mean Chet from "Wierd Science"!
You're assuming that the poor fish can see the blade coming in time to get out of the way - this is the north atlantic we're talking about. The fish wuold be lucky to see it 3 feet away.
Of course it's pronounced "Bump-us". I was thru there a couple of weekends ago.
That's Casull. Quite a pistol, no?
All true. The difference in open vs shorted voltages for a real battery is caused by internal resistance. That's also the reason for it boiling the electrolyte! In your example, if the battery's short-circuit current is 500A and terminal voltage is 1V, the internal resistance would be 0.022 Ohm. The power dissipated by the battery would be 5500 Watts - the same power as a household electric water heater element.
Additionally, the active devices in that inverter (typically MOSFETs) are being asked to switch 100A - MOSFETs are much happier switching higher voltage/lower current than old bipolar devices. This will boost efficiency.
2003 Mini Cooper S - electrically-driven steering pump. Woo Hoo!
If manufactures would wire their batteries in series instead of parallel, they would have incredibly high voltages, which essentially means free power, and electric cars could run much longer with much smaller batteries.
My bother's Prius has a 270V battery pack - a whole boatload of normal cells in series, just as you said.
Some do. The computer in my 2003 Mini Cooper S stages stuff coming on, including the nav system, interior fan and AC compressor. It's nice on the motor to get up to speed before nailing it with the compressor and alternator loads.
My brother has one of these. He was tickled pink to get 50 mpg tooling around Portland w/ the AC on.
It sounds like you guys need a 270 to 12V switching converter. It shouldn't be too hard to design one that'll put out 20-30 Amps at 14V, which would be enough to charge your 12V battery (or start the engine, for that matter).
I also suggest installing a pull-start cord under the hood, just in case.
I would like to see SUV's treated as passenger vehicles and not trucks. They would then have to abide by the same safety criteria small cars do. Currently, they do not.
As far as banning SUV's, state and federal governments already decide what you can and cannot drive (state inspections, etc). I don't _personally_ want to decide what you drive, but if your huge SUV is a hazard to others on the road (which it is), then the appropriate governing body needs to review whether or not that risk is offset by your desire to drive such a behemoth.
I think every road should be an HOV lane based on vehicle weight/passenger weight - you should be allowed about 3000 lb of vehicle for the first passenger and 750 for each passenger thereafter.
I'm no greenie, but if people are serious about cleaning up the environment and lessening our reliance on fossil and/or foreign energy sources, things like this will be the norm, not the exception.
PS: Mini's weigh about 2570lbs dry, and are as tall and wide as my wife's 2000 Mitsu Galant. It's two feet shorter, though ;-)
I'm sure they've thought of it, but no new oil flow design can fully eliminate the effects of these two diametrically opposed issues. Either you want the oil to stay on the moving parts for startup, or you want it off of the moving parts quickly to avoid the crunchy effect. Using synthetic oil in very light grades (0w-20, 5w-30, etc) helps mitigate either problem, but does not solve them.
Additionally, each start cycle introduces raw gas into the cylinder that may not be consumed. Some of this gas gets past the rings, and will wash the oil from the inside of the cylinder (diluting the oil in the process).
Starting your car is the worst thing you can do to it - additional wear, thermal cycling of metal parts, etc. More start/stops means shorter life for a particular engine.
By your description, you seem like one of the few on the road that actually _use_ your SUV more than 10% of the time.
You know, I think I'd like to see vehicles that large be banned from being owned by the general public. If you need one to pull a boat, trailer, etc, have them easily available to rent when needed.
Of course, I'm biased - I drive a 2003 Mini Cooper S ;-)
Variable valve timing is one of the major reasons for the push to get 48V batteries in cars. You could eliminate the whole camshaft, timing (chain | belt), and the (lifters & rockers) | (pushrods). Quite a savings in moving, lubricated parts, and adds the ability to control that last variable in the computer-controlled combustion equation.
Of course the savings in copper would be significant, too. Remember that:
- voltage drop across a conductor is proportional to the current, not the voltage (V=IR)
- the power delivered to the load is the product of voltage and current (P=IV)
- the _power_ carrying capacity of a wire is limited by the current, not the voltage
The lowest loss way to deliver power is with high voltage and low current thru a small wire, not high current/low voltage thru a huge wire as is done now.You mean like this seriously ugly car from this whole page of seriously ugly cars?
I wake up in the morning, drag myself to work, go home exhausted, and do it all over again, day after day. I don't even get free fish!
Not necessarly strange; it has been common in human cultures to associate eating something with assimilating the attributes of the eaten, or desirables attributes associated to the eaten.
It apparently applies to Martian cultures, too. They call it "Grokking".
The public, on the other hand, has plenty of malice and destructive intent. I don't trust them with my data as far as I can throw 'em.
The fallacy in your argument, IMHO, is that you seem to view trust as a black or white issue. I may not trust my employees, but I trust the public a whole heckuva lot less.