Memage snagged from...
Sep. 29th, 2004 02:50 pm... Snagged from
dingo_
Re-formatted into an LJ-Poll by me.
Yes or No answers please. =^.^=
MythBusters can be fun...
Sep. 22nd, 2004 02:18 am...but god damnit they miss the obvious stuff sometimes.
Watched their 'review' of the 'ice bullet' idea. And I noticed something blatantly wrong with their ENTIRE setup.
Density.
Of course the ice bullet vaporized into steam. It's density is only 917kg/meter cubed, even straight lead is well over 11000kg/meter cubed. Roughly, it's 1/12th the density, meaning it needs roughly 1/12th the gunpowder to reach the same muzzle velocity. It's akin to shooting a .357 round loaded with over 120 grains of a powder that would normally only take 10 grains.
Even a lead or steel bullet would 'vaporize' and splinter apart under that sort of load.
So, I started doing the math...
Divide the weight of the bullet by 12, and keep the muzzle velocity the same, assume a 30.06 bullet size as a 'standard' rifle to work from...
And the bullet would end up having roughly the impact force of a .357 Magnum. Using what would seem to be barely any powder what-so-ever.
Now, as a preventative step, to further reduce the heat imparted on the 'ice round' takes another shift in mechanics, which any 'assassins load' would do anyways to accomidate a silencer. Shifting to a sub-sonic load, to remove the air friction and sound barrier further obliterating the bullet, not to mention the majority of the 'bang' from the round. This could easilly cut the powder load in half again, so now we're down to 1/24th the 'normal' powder load. Suddenly, there's a lot of room in that casing. And I mean a fuck-load of room, especially by bullet-casing standards.
We could just use up all that extra space with wadding... but then I thought of an interesting, and simple solution to any other heat problems. Take essentially a gelcap (or just a super-thin plastic capsule) of liquid nitrogen, load the gunpowder, then a normal wad, then that gelcap, then a tissue-paper wad, THEN the ice bullet. Now, when you fire things... you have a reasonable muzzle velocity target, with almost zero air friction heating up the leading edge of the bullet, and the initial 'impact' will sent a chilling jolt of liquid nitrogen down the barrel just behind the ice round to be vaporized in it's place, with the added benefit of the rapid expansion of the liquid nitrogen acting like an 'air cannon' to boost the ice projectile's speed as it travels the barrel.
And that is why I think I have far, far too much time on my hands, when I find myself 'mythbusting' mystbusters using simple math, instead of 'feel good' ideas like teflon-coating the ice bullet, trying to grow a monocrystalline ice bullet, or similair nonsense. =^.^=
Watched their 'review' of the 'ice bullet' idea. And I noticed something blatantly wrong with their ENTIRE setup.
Density.
Of course the ice bullet vaporized into steam. It's density is only 917kg/meter cubed, even straight lead is well over 11000kg/meter cubed. Roughly, it's 1/12th the density, meaning it needs roughly 1/12th the gunpowder to reach the same muzzle velocity. It's akin to shooting a .357 round loaded with over 120 grains of a powder that would normally only take 10 grains.
Even a lead or steel bullet would 'vaporize' and splinter apart under that sort of load.
So, I started doing the math...
Divide the weight of the bullet by 12, and keep the muzzle velocity the same, assume a 30.06 bullet size as a 'standard' rifle to work from...
And the bullet would end up having roughly the impact force of a .357 Magnum. Using what would seem to be barely any powder what-so-ever.
Now, as a preventative step, to further reduce the heat imparted on the 'ice round' takes another shift in mechanics, which any 'assassins load' would do anyways to accomidate a silencer. Shifting to a sub-sonic load, to remove the air friction and sound barrier further obliterating the bullet, not to mention the majority of the 'bang' from the round. This could easilly cut the powder load in half again, so now we're down to 1/24th the 'normal' powder load. Suddenly, there's a lot of room in that casing. And I mean a fuck-load of room, especially by bullet-casing standards.
We could just use up all that extra space with wadding... but then I thought of an interesting, and simple solution to any other heat problems. Take essentially a gelcap (or just a super-thin plastic capsule) of liquid nitrogen, load the gunpowder, then a normal wad, then that gelcap, then a tissue-paper wad, THEN the ice bullet. Now, when you fire things... you have a reasonable muzzle velocity target, with almost zero air friction heating up the leading edge of the bullet, and the initial 'impact' will sent a chilling jolt of liquid nitrogen down the barrel just behind the ice round to be vaporized in it's place, with the added benefit of the rapid expansion of the liquid nitrogen acting like an 'air cannon' to boost the ice projectile's speed as it travels the barrel.
And that is why I think I have far, far too much time on my hands, when I find myself 'mythbusting' mystbusters using simple math, instead of 'feel good' ideas like teflon-coating the ice bullet, trying to grow a monocrystalline ice bullet, or similair nonsense. =^.^=
Well... after several tanks of gas...
Sep. 15th, 2004 04:57 pm...I average about 32 MPG in mostly stop-and-go City driving, and that's when I'm driving on the Acceleration side with high RPM's and late shifting, which is rather wasteful of gas. This next tank of gas I'm going to be driving for economy, and see how good my milage gets then. Doing some quick math however, shifting 'on time' instead of 'late' should push me up nearly to 38 MPG for the same driving. If I can get the time, money, and tools to locate and install a 5th gear from one of the 'HF' manual transmissions for the same year car I have currently however, I could well hit 45MPG for highway driving, which would let me get to the Bay Area on a single tank of gas, since the car holds just over 11 gallons.
So, yeah, bay area and back for $35? That's pretty decent. :-)
Now to save up the $150 to replace the driver-side CV boot and axle. The CV boot's got some damage from being left unprotected against the elements on a mostly non-moving vehicle for years, same as the tires themselves had when I got the car.
Once I do that, the only outstanding work needed or desired is:
So, yeah, bay area and back for $35? That's pretty decent. :-)
Now to save up the $150 to replace the driver-side CV boot and axle. The CV boot's got some damage from being left unprotected against the elements on a mostly non-moving vehicle for years, same as the tires themselves had when I got the car.
Once I do that, the only outstanding work needed or desired is:
- Get some sheet-metal and L-corner metal welded into the back to deepen, seal, and extend the existing 'spare tire' area far enough to hold two full-sized spare tires, two small compartments to either side for things like tire chains, and seal off the area forward of the wheel wells to the back footwells as covered 'trunk' spare with fold-up covers, so the back area can be used for medium-capacity storage and transport of tools, parts, and similair. ($200-$300 by current estimates between me and Stalking Cat, who I'd pay to do all the welding and metal-work since I both trust him, and can't think of anyone I'd rather pay to do work like that)
- Flush the radiator system, not just drain it, but FLUSH the whole thing. ($30-$45 depending on where I go)
- Replace the passenger-side front brake calipre ($75, extremely slow leak, only a permenant damp spot that if you wick off the fluid with a paper towel you can verify is brake fluid)
- Near-identical issue with the master brake resevoir ($150 for that)
- Neither of the above are pressing, and both can be handled by keeping a $5 bottle of brake fluid in the car that I check the resevoir with every time I get an oil change, in fact both might just be non-issues resulting from the car sitting out for so long
- Replacing the oil in the entire car with straight 30W, transmission and engine both, since they are both rated to run on that, so I'll be able to keep a unified oil supply for the vehicle ($30 or so for my next oil change, also need to look into a source to get recycled 30W from)
- Replace the windshield ($200 new, or a LOT less if I can pull one from a junkyard, may explore other options to replace the windshield with, such as plastic-coated lexan or similair further down the road)
- Complete suspension system overhaul, mostly for a softer ride and (again) improved traction when dealing with rough, dirt or snow-surfaced roads. (Cost unknown, haven't looked into it. Definately need the work though.)
- Replace the rims next time I buy new wheels, plus-sizing by 1 or 2 steps to get into a more 'standard' size tire, and away from the 13" rims the car came stock with. This is actually a non-performance purchase. 13" tires can cost as much as 200% of what a 14" or 15" tire can cost, in part because so few cars use them anymore, and in part because they require VERY high aspect ratios, meaning they need heavilly reinforced sidewalls on the tires, making them more expensive. It will also let me get tires approximately 30-40mm wider than the original stock 165/70/13's the car came with, for highly improved traction when on dirt roads or on ice and snow. (Around $350 for the set of tires AND rims, compared to $325 for JUST the tires for 13" rims, and that's for the cheapest 13" tires CostCo sells)
Off to LaborReady...
Sep. 9th, 2004 03:02 amBoots laced up with a very decorative lace that chew up the couple of FEET of excess laces I have.
Clothes clean and dry.
Car running, albeit with worn-out, dying tires.
Let's hope I get a hundred bucks or more out of LaborReady between today and tommorow, so I can buy at least two replacement tires. Ideally, I'd pick up a full set, but that's off in the future still. Wishfully-thinking, I'll be picking up a new set of rims as well, but not for performance reasons so much as to reduce the long-term cost of tires on this car. The stock tires (165/70/13's) are a noticable jump UP in price compared to plus-sizing by one or two steps. As in, $80 new versus $45-$55 new per tire price difference. And the rims will cost about $40 a piece, so they'll pay for themselves if I have to replace the tires once.
Clothes clean and dry.
Car running, albeit with worn-out, dying tires.
Let's hope I get a hundred bucks or more out of LaborReady between today and tommorow, so I can buy at least two replacement tires. Ideally, I'd pick up a full set, but that's off in the future still. Wishfully-thinking, I'll be picking up a new set of rims as well, but not for performance reasons so much as to reduce the long-term cost of tires on this car. The stock tires (165/70/13's) are a noticable jump UP in price compared to plus-sizing by one or two steps. As in, $80 new versus $45-$55 new per tire price difference. And the rims will cost about $40 a piece, so they'll pay for themselves if I have to replace the tires once.
Nosing about web-pages...
Aug. 28th, 2004 06:00 am...due to a discussion I had with a friend about digital car readouts.
Am wondering why everyone seems to use such complicated methods of doing digital tachometers based on wierd, velocity-measuring circuits that seem overly complex... why not just run one cable into the engine compartment, and use an inductive probe to sample one spark-plug wire? Then just hook that 'pulse' up to a delay-circuit such that the first 'pulse' after each timed interval latches the display, the next resets the count. If you want to be really 'precise' and have a smoothly-changing display instead of a once-a-second update, have 10 counters, and 'time out' each one once a second, set out of phase with each other by 1/10th of a second. As long as you adjust the counter circuit based on the number of cylinders in the engine, the approach would work, and be very simple to construct as far as I can tell.
Each counter would require four 555 chips set up for base-10 counting to handle up to 9999 rpms, a static flip-flop bank to 'store' the currently-displayed number, and a four-digit base-10-to-7-segment-LED decoder to actually display the stored number. The 'time out' circuit would be another 555 chip. The only 'complexity' would be making the cyclic-phased reset for 10 of those, but even that's trivial. Just set up a 1/10th of a second 'trigger' that cycles another 555 chip as a base-10 counter, triggering each of the 'time out' sub-circuits in order.
Am wondering why everyone seems to use such complicated methods of doing digital tachometers based on wierd, velocity-measuring circuits that seem overly complex... why not just run one cable into the engine compartment, and use an inductive probe to sample one spark-plug wire? Then just hook that 'pulse' up to a delay-circuit such that the first 'pulse' after each timed interval latches the display, the next resets the count. If you want to be really 'precise' and have a smoothly-changing display instead of a once-a-second update, have 10 counters, and 'time out' each one once a second, set out of phase with each other by 1/10th of a second. As long as you adjust the counter circuit based on the number of cylinders in the engine, the approach would work, and be very simple to construct as far as I can tell.
Each counter would require four 555 chips set up for base-10 counting to handle up to 9999 rpms, a static flip-flop bank to 'store' the currently-displayed number, and a four-digit base-10-to-7-segment-LED decoder to actually display the stored number. The 'time out' circuit would be another 555 chip. The only 'complexity' would be making the cyclic-phased reset for 10 of those, but even that's trivial. Just set up a 1/10th of a second 'trigger' that cycles another 555 chip as a base-10 counter, triggering each of the 'time out' sub-circuits in order.
At least it runs...
Aug. 26th, 2004 08:57 pmRight now, it doesn't do much of anything at all else, but the engine (from poking under the hood and examining the major components) is in marvelous shape, and the transmission is (currently) in good condition as is the frame itself.
Unfortunately, that's about ALL that's in good shape. But damnit... this car Is Not Going To Die.
So, to make sure that doesn't happen... I have to do all the following, roughly in order unless someone out there thinks something is more or less important than I'm making it:
Buy a muffler and install it. (Priority issue, needed to pass smog.)
Double-change the engine oil and filter with a tank of detergent additive-added high-octane gas run through the engine between changes. (Priority issue to improve emissions to help pass smog.)
Adjust the idle higher. (Smog. Adjust down afterwards. Easy to do, pop distributor cap, adjustment is made inside.)
Replace the catalytic converter. (Possibly needed to pass smog, have to research lifetime for those on this model.)
Change the transmission/differential oil.
Replace the air filter, because the car was sitting for so damn long.
Replace the Main and Auxiliary fuel filters, because the fuel previously in the tank had sat so long it was decomposing badly.
Drain, flush, refill, and finally go over the radiator with a pair of tweezers and patience to clean out debris.
Check the clutch adjustments and wear.
Replace all brake-pads and refill the brake fluid levels.
Replace the center-mount rear-view mirror. (It doesn't stay centered, too easy to turn to the left, or tilt down. Should be cheap and easy to unbolt the existing one and bolt a new one onto the existing mast.)
Check and adjust the shocks.
Get a four-wheel alignment performed on the car.
Strip out all the panelling in the car, along with the back seats and back cargo matting and carpet, as it's ancient to the point of disaster, and needs to be reupholstered badly. This has the side-effect of allowing ready access to the air vents, so they can be disassembled and cleared, since the vents have a direct-flow path from the base of the hood throughout the front area of the car that I'm really damn sure is clogged beyond recognition.
( The one 'ASAP when convenient' fix I need to do takes a bit of explaining, as I also want direct input from others on this aspect. )
Unfortunately, that's about ALL that's in good shape. But damnit... this car Is Not Going To Die.
So, to make sure that doesn't happen... I have to do all the following, roughly in order unless someone out there thinks something is more or less important than I'm making it:
Buy a muffler and install it. (Priority issue, needed to pass smog.)
Double-change the engine oil and filter with a tank of detergent additive-added high-octane gas run through the engine between changes. (Priority issue to improve emissions to help pass smog.)
Adjust the idle higher. (Smog. Adjust down afterwards. Easy to do, pop distributor cap, adjustment is made inside.)
Replace the catalytic converter. (Possibly needed to pass smog, have to research lifetime for those on this model.)
Change the transmission/differential oil.
Replace the air filter, because the car was sitting for so damn long.
Replace the Main and Auxiliary fuel filters, because the fuel previously in the tank had sat so long it was decomposing badly.
Drain, flush, refill, and finally go over the radiator with a pair of tweezers and patience to clean out debris.
Check the clutch adjustments and wear.
Replace all brake-pads and refill the brake fluid levels.
Replace the center-mount rear-view mirror. (It doesn't stay centered, too easy to turn to the left, or tilt down. Should be cheap and easy to unbolt the existing one and bolt a new one onto the existing mast.)
Check and adjust the shocks.
Get a four-wheel alignment performed on the car.
Strip out all the panelling in the car, along with the back seats and back cargo matting and carpet, as it's ancient to the point of disaster, and needs to be reupholstered badly. This has the side-effect of allowing ready access to the air vents, so they can be disassembled and cleared, since the vents have a direct-flow path from the base of the hood throughout the front area of the car that I'm really damn sure is clogged beyond recognition.
( The one 'ASAP when convenient' fix I need to do takes a bit of explaining, as I also want direct input from others on this aspect. )
Thoughts leading nowhere...
Aug. 24th, 2004 04:10 pm...namely I've been poking at this site that details an interesting 'electric motor' layout that basically has the outer shell of an electric motor rotate, instead of the inner unit, so the mechanism can be mounted inside a wheel, somewhat akin to building an electric differential instead of a mechanical one.
And I started doing the math and running numbers as I have a habit of doing...
And I realized that the smaller wheel, the 350, could obtain 120mph safely.
So I totalled up the power consumption for such a beast.
And it's only 40kw if you want 3 tons nominal weight capacity (5 tons maximum), with two of the 350's, mounted one in front and one in back for a total of four electric motors directly driving four wheels.
In a package that would weigh approximately 375lbs for the four-wheel, 40kw version.
So I started looking around... and ran into my one 'stumbling block' of sorts. Most methods of generating 40kw are rather... abnormally sized. In raw volume, they're more than small enough, but they're in very obnoxious sizes, as they're usually generators intended for backup use, mounted to fixed mounts, or occasionally set up on towable mini-trailers.
And my 'stumbling block' in all this, is that I can't track down anywhere that explains what kind of HP I'd need to crank out 80kw of power, though I found a vague reference in a 10kw generator powered by an 18hp engine. If that holds, that would be approximately 75hp for 40kw, which sounds reasonable, but something I'm simply unsure how to investigate or verify further.
And if that proved accurate and true, suddenly a very evil design idea for a mid-engine, 4WD 'sports car' comes to mind, based on these things.
As for my purpose researching all this... none, really, just curiosity if a 'sports car' based on electric motors would be do-able, if you were targetting performance instead of fuel effeciency.
That, and it would be fun to have a vehicle rated for 5 tons loaded capacity, that was still able to drive at 120mph, running solely on a 75hp engine at it's core. :-)
And I started doing the math and running numbers as I have a habit of doing...
And I realized that the smaller wheel, the 350, could obtain 120mph safely.
So I totalled up the power consumption for such a beast.
And it's only 40kw if you want 3 tons nominal weight capacity (5 tons maximum), with two of the 350's, mounted one in front and one in back for a total of four electric motors directly driving four wheels.
In a package that would weigh approximately 375lbs for the four-wheel, 40kw version.
So I started looking around... and ran into my one 'stumbling block' of sorts. Most methods of generating 40kw are rather... abnormally sized. In raw volume, they're more than small enough, but they're in very obnoxious sizes, as they're usually generators intended for backup use, mounted to fixed mounts, or occasionally set up on towable mini-trailers.
And my 'stumbling block' in all this, is that I can't track down anywhere that explains what kind of HP I'd need to crank out 80kw of power, though I found a vague reference in a 10kw generator powered by an 18hp engine. If that holds, that would be approximately 75hp for 40kw, which sounds reasonable, but something I'm simply unsure how to investigate or verify further.
And if that proved accurate and true, suddenly a very evil design idea for a mid-engine, 4WD 'sports car' comes to mind, based on these things.
As for my purpose researching all this... none, really, just curiosity if a 'sports car' based on electric motors would be do-able, if you were targetting performance instead of fuel effeciency.
That, and it would be fun to have a vehicle rated for 5 tons loaded capacity, that was still able to drive at 120mph, running solely on a 75hp engine at it's core. :-)
Time to get geared up for NaNoWriMo...
Aug. 12th, 2004 12:35 pmAnd no, I'm not going to actually enter the main competition 'properly' either. It's a degree of pomp and circumstance I don't feel the need to partake in. I'll simply write, and see where I end up at the end of that month.
But that's not the real point of this post. The real point is to make (yet another link) to John Taylor Gatto's (in)famous speech.
With a question for you all... read the article. Read it throughly... then, ( vote! )
But that's not the real point of this post. The real point is to make (yet another link) to John Taylor Gatto's (in)famous speech.
With a question for you all... read the article. Read it throughly... then, ( vote! )
Random ideas boiling in my head...
Aug. 6th, 2004 06:46 amI doubt many (any?) people have heard of this game, that read my LJ.
Check this out.
It's called either "Demon Dice" or "Chaos Progenitus" and is, like some other games, a semi-collectable dice game. In this one, instead of building armies and units, you build a single monster. 13 Dice, at least one 'Body' part needed, if all your 'Body' parts are dead, you lose, set em' up and go at it. It's very straight-forward, but it's also very, VERY hard to locate any of most of the time, as it's (more or less) out of print these days.
So... I got to thinking.
A) Would an on-line version of this game (with some kind of graphics or even 3D models, there's not many parts, and a limited number of combinations) be interesting to play with? Possibly with the option to hide some of the game-mechanics of how things work, so it's more "click what to attack, let the Monster figure out how to attack it" each round, so you can worry less about all the raw numbers and stats, and just Get On With The Beatdown.
B) Why hasn't this been re-released as a party game of sorts? The equivilant of the One With Everything package Steve Jackson games released.
Check this out.
It's called either "Demon Dice" or "Chaos Progenitus" and is, like some other games, a semi-collectable dice game. In this one, instead of building armies and units, you build a single monster. 13 Dice, at least one 'Body' part needed, if all your 'Body' parts are dead, you lose, set em' up and go at it. It's very straight-forward, but it's also very, VERY hard to locate any of most of the time, as it's (more or less) out of print these days.
So... I got to thinking.
A) Would an on-line version of this game (with some kind of graphics or even 3D models, there's not many parts, and a limited number of combinations) be interesting to play with? Possibly with the option to hide some of the game-mechanics of how things work, so it's more "click what to attack, let the Monster figure out how to attack it" each round, so you can worry less about all the raw numbers and stats, and just Get On With The Beatdown.
B) Why hasn't this been re-released as a party game of sorts? The equivilant of the One With Everything package Steve Jackson games released.