Time to STOMP Sid!

[rocketkart]

its like a lollipop with a tootsie roll in the center of it. you never had one?

 

[itsid]

oh so soft candy in hard candy.. right?

Well I don't know about you, but the last lollipop I had .. that was... uhm ...well there must be a cave carving somewhere in middle asia showing me with that lollipop;

Anyways, few licks and a bite and it's gone.

But if that was a genuine question, then my answer would be:
that depends:
on age, tongue size, amount of saliva invloved and viscosity of said saliva and maybe even on temperature
It's about how fast can you dissolve the sugar crystals, and how many papilla can make contact with what force to 'scrub' it.

I'd say it's either a fun question (a rhyme most likely) or there is no answer without an essay about many different factors

'sid

 

[fowler]

we will try a bit of aussie history

first white men to Australia

and what was the name of the ship that was wreaked on a reef west of Australia
hints the ship was owned by a huge transport company
and some survivors turned cannibal
the ship

if that doesnt get him we will try some aboriginal history

 

[Doc Sprocket]

oh so soft candy in hard candy.. right?

Well I don't know about you, but the last lollipop I had .. that was... uhm ...well there must be a cave carving somewhere in middle asia showing me with that lollipop;

Anyways, few licks and a bite and it's gone.

But if that was a genuine question, then my answer would be:
that depends:
on age, tongue size, amount of saliva invloved and viscosity of said saliva and maybe even on temperature
It's about how fast can you dissolve the sugar crystals, and how many papilla can make contact with what force to 'scrub' it.

I'd say it's either a fun question (a rhyme most likely) or there is no answer without an essay about many different factors

'sid

I swear that tongue texture would factor in, too...

 

[fowler]

Who actually licks them?

The answer would be determined by
How much jaw power do u have
And what are the condition of your teeth

 

[itsid]

we will try a bit of aussie history

first white men to Australia

and what was the name of the ship that was wreaked on a reef west of Australia
hints the ship was owned by a huge transport company
and some survivors turned cannibal
the ship

if that doesnt get him we will try some aboriginal history

first white men is unknown, a number of portugese, french, spain and netherland ships have been there, but not for exploration (thus undocumented)
first documented european was 1606 Willem Jansz at Kap York,

James Cook was 1770, so a lot later

you got me with the ship wreck; I'd say Batavia of the dutch east india company, but I have no idea if some survivors turned cannibal (and I think that is a part I would have remebered )
but the survivors killed each other 110 people in just two month.

'sid

 

[machinist@large]

Here's a nice clean one; what is approximately the size of a beer keg and is capable of generating over 75,000 HP?

(and yes, that # is correct 75,000 HP) Pat

 

[rocketkart]

jet engine? or a A bomb?

 

[machinist@large]

jet engine? or a A bomb?

Nope, it's not a jet, and most definitely non nuclear. It's only been used for peaceful purposes.

 

[itsid]

jet engine? or a A bomb?

a 75000 HP jet engine is about the size of a JumboJet engine, so that would be one large beer keg
even the small engines in a jetfighter (say the typhoon) is much larger than a beer keg...
but one alone has about that power (78000 HP)

the smallest nuclear power plant I know is a NuScale (15ft diameter and 80ft tall) capable of 45MW.

That's a tricky question, that power densitiy is enormous;
So I doubt it'll be a beer keg'ish portable device.

Say like the salt-reservoir in a solar power plant, beer keg sized melting pot, and capable of generating several megawatts, but not without the massive mirror array beneath it

Hm, I know no device with a powerdensity like that

So no electric generator, no turbine setup (both available in 56MW ranges, but nowhere near that size) no nuclear device...

that leaves us with hydrogen fuel cells, but I doubt there is any single fuel cell capable of delivering 56MW (there could be an array of fuel cells though *shrugs*)
Still the size doesn't fit in this equation.

Rocket engines are quite powerfull, and if we talk about a single module without tanks and such they might be small enough in size; but I don't know any that small and that powerfull
(and I don't even remember how to convert thrust to horsepower atm)

So no.. I have no idea

'sid

 

[machinist@large]

I should string this out a little more, but since I stumped Sid, I spill it. It's the preburner engine that powers the main fuel pumps in the main engines aboard the Space Transportation System- AKA NASA's "Space Shuttle".

The reason I told rocketkart that it wasn't a jet is because it isn't. It does have blades like a turbine, but no jet engine that I've ever read about generates internal working pressures in excess of 5,000 PSI. I say in excess of because the exhaust from the turbo pump is also pumped into the main combustion chamber of the engine while the fuel it's pumping is being fed to the engine at 5,000 PSI. The only way they could keep the bearings alive was to run liquid O2 thru the center of the pump shaft to keep the temperatures under control.

While I don't know who said it first, I've seen several sources claim that you could get a doctorate from just mapping out the ignition sequence alone on one of these.....

 

[DaiSan76]

I think Pineapplejuice


'sid

None, because footballs don't have feathers.

 

[itsid]

I should string this out a little more, but since I stumped Sid, I spill it. It's the preburner engine that powers the main fuel pumps in the main engines aboard the Space Transportation System- AKA NASA's "Space Shuttle".

so basically part of a rocket engine

Rocket engines are quite powerfull, and if we talk about a single module without tanks and such they might be small enough in size; but I don't know any that small and that powerfull
(and I don't even remember how to convert thrust to horsepower atm)

beer keg 16-17 in diameter x 23 inches roughly.. right?

Bad thing about your question:
you mixed two different parts.
The low pressure fuel turbo pump is about the size of a beer keg (18 dia by 24 inches) but it doesn't produce anything CLOSE to that amount of power, in fact it has to be powered by the MAIN engine to provide fuel to the preburner!
it's also feeding the high pressure fuel turbo pump
which is unfortunately bigger (22 dia by 43 inches)
but on the other hand indeed is powered by the preburner for about 3sec. (self sustaining process)
and said preburner is the same diameter and just about an inch shorter than the HPFTP it is welded to.
and now for the really bad part without the LPFTP the HPFTP is unable to produce ANY power.
together they produce 71.200 HP (well in the RS-25 engine)

so we're talking about 22 x 85 inches [HPFTP and preburner are welded together] plus additional LPFTP (the beer keg) plus other parts to get it started (say the main engine, we don't measure that one, do we )

I don't think we can call that about the size of a beer keg, even if we Only measure the preburner, it's diameter is as big as the beer kegs height, and it's height twice as big.
The burning device itself is much smaller to be honest (10 inch in diameter and just 4.5 in length)

Oh well... whatever...

http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2011/ph240/nguyen1/docs/SSME_PRESENTATION.pdf

None, because footballs don't have feathers.

Uh DaiSan, take a closer look... where I am it's already Monday,
so cheesecake!

'sid

 

[fowler]

Yep
Batavia

Gotta love Mondays

Woke up at 4:30 am to start work at 6
Then got to work to learn I was ment to be at Tafe (mechanic school)
And I didn't have to be there till 8
Back home to get books off to tafe

Now it's 7:30 and I'm I'm traffic
Yay

#head f*** Monday

 

[itsid]

Yep
Batavia

Hey, great.. yet another lucky guess

That was basically the name of the only ship wreck I know near Australia,
and only because that -what's his name- Cornelius(wasn't that the Ape docotor in planet of the apes??) murdered 110 people in just two month just because he 'felt like it'.

Just because I couldn't remeber the name of a bicycle company (batavus) and ended up at wikipedia somehow after a weekend in Holland...



'sid

 

[machinist@large]

so basically part of a rocket engine



beer keg 16-17 in diameter x 23 inches roughly.. right?

Bad thing about your question:
you mixed two different parts.
The low pressure fuel turbo pump is about the size of a beer keg (18 dia by 24 inches) but it doesn't produce anything CLOSE to that amount of power, in fact it has to be powered by the MAIN engine to provide fuel to the preburner!
it's also feeding the high pressure fuel turbo pump
which is unfortunately bigger (22 dia by 43 inches)
but on the other hand indeed is powered by the preburner for about 3sec. (self sustaining process)
and said preburner is the same diameter and just about an inch shorter than the HPFTP it is welded to.
and now for the really bad part without the LPFTP the HPFTP is unable to produce ANY power.
together they produce 71.200 HP (well in the RS-25 engine)

so we're talking about 22 x 85 inches [HPFTP and preburner are welded together] plus additional LPFTP (the beer keg) plus other parts to get it started (say the main engine, we don't measure that one, do we )

I don't think we can call that about the size of a beer keg, even if we Only measure the preburner, it's diameter is as big as the beer kegs height, and it's height twice as big.
The burning device itself is much smaller to be honest (10 inch in diameter and just 4.5 in length)

Oh well... whatever...



'sid

'sid, I'm not going to claim you're wrong; all I can do is give you the foot notes that I have: the fact that I miss quoted the #'s is pretty shameful on my part.....

OK: the 75,000 HP quote comes from the Spring 2011 Collectors edition of Air & Space Smithsonian;(Space Shuttle 1981-2011) Right hand column of page 26, two paragraphs from the bottom. It lists " The high pressure turbo pump, for example, was only two feet in diameter and only weighed 750 pounds but generated 75,000 HP...

(Here is where I got my #'s mixed up)

...The turbopump increased of the hydrogen flowing thru it from 250 PSI to 7000 PSI.....

The article takes up 7 pages, strictly covering the development of the STS's main engines. It's a dog gone good read. The description of what the operating environment inside the engine comes from the Sept. 2013 addition of Air & Space, the Above & Beyond section. In it it also threw out another Trivia Tid Bit; the three main engines combined created the output equivalent of 22.996 Hoover dams.....

My copy of "Facts on File, Dictionary of Space Technology" copyright 2004 provides some info as well, but it's not organized to cover the specific info that Air & Space gave me. If I'm mistaken, I apologize in advance...

 

[itsid]

I don't know if you're wrong, the few info I have is from the SSME Presentation linked above and a wikipedia article...

Since I mentioned rocket engines as an idea up there, I though I might take a look into some, that included different engines from satellites to mars probes and of course the space shuttle.
So, I was pretty confident that it wasn't a rocket motor (and it's not.. just a part of it )
but I read that articel yesterday and as always pretty much completely...
I saw the 'almost' matching numbers and thought *dang that's sooo close! but no cigar*

So I only mentioned rocket motors in general and gave up

'sid

 

[machinist@large]

Sorry folks; this got a little long....


'sid, I think I got a mutually acceptable answer here; the Wiki you linked for me goes into more detail than the Air & Space articles I was referencing. Page 28 of the spring 2011 collectors edition states "...You could get a Ph.D in systems engineering just diagramming the SSME (Space Shuttle Main Engine) start sequence. Here's the Cliff Notes version.....".

Basically, I was working with what info I had; in my reference matl. they refer to the turbo pumps almost as a stand alone...

They also state just how hard it was to get them to run reliably; between the extremely high pressures involved, they are (as far as I've been able to find) the only liquid fuel design that is throttlable. Most designs don't get into that level of complexity. It's been stated over and over that these things ran on the ragged edge of metallurgical science. After Challenger, NASA wanted to try to get more power out of the design for emergencies: the pumps started to fail around the 109% power level. The only way they could quit blowing up stuff on the test stand was to quit testing at 109%.

The fact that both Challenger and Columbia were lost for other reasons show's that they at least had learned what the limits of the main engines were.

I'm sad that they retired the last three orbiters, but I understand it as well. The odds of another accident with loss of the crew were just to high. NASA lost a lot of capability when the program ended; the problem is the human race doesn't yet have the technology to make something that complex as safe as we would like....

 

[machinist@large]

Here's another aerospace trivia question. When Northrop Grumman was designing the Marine/ Royal Navy variant of the Joint Strike Fighter (F-35), they were running into big problems trying to come up with enough power for it to land vertically using just the thrust of the engine alone, like the original Harrier and Boeing's proposed entrant in the competition.

Then some one wondered "How much rotational HP can we get out of the engine to run a fan?" I've seen several different figures, so we'll just shoot for the average here.....

 

[rocketkart]

im going to say 1400 hp give or take.