hes so nice, congratulating the editor and even asking for a pay raise! the editors of these shows are the real in-sung heros. we are all editors on this blessed day. :)
Biggest difference between a Bentley and a falcon is that a falcon doesn't carry the stigma of being associated with drug dealers and a corrupt politicians.
By my estimate, the minimum average power of the trebuchet would have to be ~132 kW or ~178 horsepower. Check my math (and my assumptions). WARNING: No one asked for this much detail. I know that. I was just having fun... :-) Ignoring air resistance (which is less of an issue the denser and smaller in cross-sectional area the projectile is) 45 degrees is the most efficient trajectory. 40 m/s vertical velocity gives us a hang time of ~8 s. 8 s * 40 m/s horizontal gives us 320 m of distance before the projectile hits the ground. Close enough. Total velocity = sqrt((40 m/s)^2 + (40 m/s)^2) = 40 sqrt(2) m/s. Kinetic energy = 0.5 * 90 kg * (40 sqrt(2) m/s)^2 = 144 kJ. Assume that the trebuchet swings in 1 second (a guess, but it's probably more than 0.5 and less than 3 s). Power = 144 kJ / 1s = 144 kW = 193 hp. Or, if you use standard gravity (9.80665 m/s^2) and solve for 300 m, it comes out around 132 kW or 178 hp. But honestly, the actual swing time of the trebuchet will account for a much larger error than my rounding gravity and the velocities. Anyway, this is about the minimum average power through the whole swing. Loses like friction and air resistance and such could add more. And, even without air resistance, the needed power increase dramatically if you deviate from 45 degrees (up or down). (With air resistance the optimum point is lower than 45 degrees, I think, but how much lower depends on the drag coefficient. But even there, deviating from the ideal angle dramatically increases the power required.) For example, staying with no air resistance, a launch angle of 30 degrees or 60 degrees gives you 153 kW (205 hp). 15 or 75 degrees gives you 265 kW (355 hp). 5 or 85 degrees gives you 762 kW (1022 hp). And the closer you get to horizontal or vertical it just keeps shooting off towards infinity because it has less hang time in which to travel 300 m horizontal, so it has to do it faster and faster, hence requiring greater and greater power. Lastly, I'll just comment that this is the average power. If you knew about the speed, angle, and force profile of the trebuchet in detail, you could calculate the peak instantaneous power when it was accelerating the projectile most quickly in the tangential direction. That would be the highest peak power and necessarily substantially higher than these values.
Harleymuun it was a joke. The editor is the one who created the subtitles, and you can’t make out what the host is saying near the end, so the editor is claiming that’s what the host was saying, even though we all know that’s not the case.
+Peter Asbjorn Hansen _liter / meter_ No, horsepower is defined in terms of imperial measure, not metric. I doubt it would be exactly _one_ litre and _one_ metre of anything subjectively very meaningful. I recall, from my UK schooling in the fifties, its being defined as 550 foot pounds per second. Also, +Poop Fingers is right: power is _the rate_ of work being done. You have merely invented a new unit of work or energy here. (Actually, I suspect that you might be joking - but let's not mislead people.) Cheers
+Jack Sainthill wow you remember stuff you learned in the 1950s, dam I was in school in the 1980s and was never taught stuff like that, your generation is the smartest imho. Cheers from Canada.
+Ranjit Very kind, but I'm pretty sure that, for a number of reasons. each successive generation has an overall tendency to be a bit brighter than the previous one. Also, I'm not so sure that imperial scientific units have been taught at all, in schools, in most countries, for some time now - so it's hardly your fault that you don't remember! Best wishes from over here.
Fun fact. A horse power isn't how much power a horse can produce. Well; a horse can produce about 14hp for a short amount of time. Rather, a conventional horsepower is the amount of power a horse can output as an average over a working day #UselessGeneralKnowledge
"1800s before the industrial revolution. Original Steam Engine. James Watt." There's so many things wrong there, mainly that the steam engine was invented in 1698 and was if I'm correct, a pump for flooded/flooding mines since waterwheels couldn't vertically transport water and buckets weren't efficient enough. James Watt I believe was the inventor if not one of the people to make it work. 1800 was more or less at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, it wasn't called that without a reason, the steam engines powered machinery which increased production which made demand higher which meant more output was required which was why the steam locomotive came around so as to help with increases in productivity but then some people rode the coal wagons and what not and so some guy named George Stephenson saw an opportunity and made passenger "coaches" and made a glorified horse tramline. The Liverpool and Manchester was made a few years later and the Rainhill Trials were held which several entrants were had to see which would run on the Liverpool and Manchester. One was even a horse on a conveyer belt. Three were entered, Rocket, San Pereil, and Novelty, the latter two starting off well but failing later on and so Rocket won. The original locomotive though was made by Richard Trevithick in 1804, I believe it was the Pen-y-darren. Speaking of which the "first steam engine" pictured was an American type (that means 4-4-0), which wasn't around until more towards the middle of the 19th Century. TL;DR This is entirely inaccurate and if James May had done it it would be properly accurate and probably 3 hours 23 minutes longer.
For metric units it's P = w * T (w for engine speed measured in radians pr. sec and T torque,measured in Nm). Output will therefore be in Watts. Divide it bye 735 and you end up with metric HP (or 745 for imperial HP)
(horsepower ÷ RPM) / 5252 = torque. horsepower does the work, automotive torque is just a ratio, for those people think that horsepower just sell cars and torque wins race's.
So power is 0:58 "all about how much you can move" but a tractor can move more than a racing car even though the 5:35 racing car has twice as much horsepower. Got it. Not confusing at all.
Na verdade, Work, é termo de mecânica clássica, vinda da física. Onde aqui chamamos de Trabalho, e se dá pela Integral da força produto variação infinitesimal do deslocamento. Quando falamos que Trabalho=Forca x Deslocamento, é algo MT vago, pois só pode ser usado para forcas constantes. Agra quando usamos um termo mais engajado, tal como esse que disse agr, serve para tudo! tudo mesmo! é umas, se n a mais importante das formulas de toda mecânica clássica! N é atoa que Einstein descreveu a famosa E=MC^2 a partir da fórmula do Trabalho.
I have a story: One day two horses are bragging to a donkey that they have 1 horsepower each and the donkey doesn’t have any, the horses turn around when they hear an engine approaching closer and closer and see a ride on lawn mower with the owner of the John Deere X380 saying that there “monster” of a machine has 22 horsepower. The horses aren’t happy that there is something stronger than them but are petrified when they hear the legitimate monster of a machine named a Peterbilt 587 with a person stepping down from the beast looking thing. The proud semi owner announces that his Peterbilt has 500 horsepower. The end. Thanks for reading this short “story” if you would even call it a story.
Another complicated explanation, If 1 tonne moved 100 ft by 1 horse took 10 seconds, then it would take 2 horses 5 seconds to move it 100ft or it would take 1 horse 20 seconds to move 2 tonnes 100ft
this is smtn which iam trying to find out for years .... yes torque menas the pulling power, say 135nm @ 2krpm torque means the engine is able to travel 135meters whem working at 2k rpm ... i still can't understand what hp does to an engine ... more hp means the engine can reach rpms easily amd earlier,say car X has 200hp @ 5k rpm while car Y has 250hp @ 5k assuming all facts and figures associated with both cars are constant and same ... so does car Y reaches 200kmphuch earlier than X takes do reach the same ... please help me
