To: | "John Burk" <joyseydevil@comcast.net>, <land-speed@Autox.Team.Net> |
---|---|
Subject: | RE: Engine Config |
From: | "Dave Dahlgren" <ddahlgren@snet.net> |
Date: | Tue, 4 Jan 2005 15:16:30 -0500 |
try this out.. use 1900 lbs and 5000 hp at the flywheel http://robrobinette.com/et.htm http://www.fantasycars.com/derek/quartmile.html http://www.virtualengine2000.com/Calculator.htm for a 4.42 et they all come out around 5000 not that the web is correct about anything but all 3 different people must be wrong as well. It is hard to assume average rates and average aero loss. Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-land-speed@Autox.Team.Net > [mailto:owner-land-speed@Autox.Team.Net]On Behalf Of John Burk > Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 1:54 PM > To: land-speed@Autox.Team.Net > Subject: Re: Engine Config > > > Dave - In reference to your doubts about a blown fuel drag engine realy > putting out the claimed hp do you agree with these numbers - > Distance fallen > in 4.42 seconds at 1 G is 1/2 A (16) X seconds squared (4.42 X > 4.42) = 312.58' > - Average acceleration for 1320' in 4.42 seconds is 1320'/312.58' > = 4.22 G's - > The accelerating force for a 1900# object at 4.22 G's is 8018# - > If the engine > is running for the entire time the equivalent of 332 mph (472.27 > ft/sec) the > hp is ft lb (472.27 ft X 8018 lb) per second (1) /550 = 6884.84 > hp - The true > hp would be reduced some because the engine runs less than the > equivalent of > 332 mph earlier in the run - Because the 6884.48 hp doesn't > include the aero > drag (plenty) 6000 to 7000 hp can't be far off - John |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: Engine config, John Burk |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: Engine config, John Burk |
Previous by Thread: | Re: Engine config, John Burk |
Next by Thread: | Re: Engine config, John Burk |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |