|   rotating weight myth? | NWO
Nov 5, 2001 11:23 AM | | regarding this thread on rotating weight: http://forums13.consumerreview.com/crforum?14@@.ee91a23/11
This post got quickly buried in downhill but I think it might be more interesting to the gram conscious. Also I have never heard anyone question the rotating weight issue but Dougal usually isn't in the crackpot camp so I'm curious.
My simple non-engineer opinion though is that he is wrong because the wheel has to accelerate much more then a non rotating part. A tire has to be accelerated to a higher speed and the faster you go the more energy it takes to go even faster.
As an example, you know how playgrounds have those round (about 10 feet across) metal things for kids to ride on that spin in the center? A girl I was dating was on one along with her sisters kids and when standing on the ground and spinning them it was quite noticeable how much energy it took if they were in the center on standing on the outside. This makes sense because they move much faster on the outside.
Another example would be if you wanted to slay some biblical giant with a rock from a sling. If the sling was 3 inches long you could spin it easy but it would not throw the rock very far and you would probably get eaten. If it was 3 feet long it would take a little effort to get it spinning fast but would also leave your sling with most of that increased energy. The point is that the rock weighs the same in either sling, it's the radius it is rotated that determines the energy requirements.
Does this sound right? |
| Completely right. Basic physics... | AZ X-Racer
Nov 5, 2001 11:46 AM | | ...and we've discussed it a bit in this discussion forum too. |
| |
