Explain why I'm able to move my by rolling the tires backward when in netural but a treadmill can't move a plane backward. Assume the planes egine is off so friction will be working against moving both objects?
You can't possibly be serious. Tell me you're just yanking my chain, or that my sarcasm meter is broken.
Of course you can push a car in neutral. Because the wheels are free spinning, just like an airplane's wheels are. How many times can this be pointed out?
The only torque the freespinning wheels of an airplane apply to the axle comes from rolling resistance between the ground and the tire, and in the bearings, the sum of which is so small compared to the force of a jet engine as to be negligible.
Originally posted by: smack Down
You can't possibly be serious. Tell me you're just yanking my chain, or that my sarcasm meter is broken.
Of course you can push a car in neutral. Because the wheels are free spinning, just like an airplane's wheels are. How many times can this be pointed out?
The only torque the freespinning wheels of an airplane apply to the axle comes from rolling resistance between the ground and the tire, and in the bearings, the sum of which is so small compared to the force of a jet engine as to be negligible.
Explain why I'm able to move my by rolling the tires backward when in netural but a treadmill can't move a plane backward. Assume the planes egine is off so friction will be working against moving both objects?
Originally posted by: MrPickins
Originally posted by: smack Down
You can't possibly be serious. Tell me you're just yanking my chain, or that my sarcasm meter is broken.
Of course you can push a car in neutral. Because the wheels are free spinning, just like an airplane's wheels are. How many times can this be pointed out?
The only torque the freespinning wheels of an airplane apply to the axle comes from rolling resistance between the ground and the tire, and in the bearings, the sum of which is so small compared to the force of a jet engine as to be negligible.
Explain why I'm able to move my by rolling the tires backward when in netural but a treadmill can't move a plane backward. Assume the planes egine is off so friction will be working against moving both objects?
You're not rolling the tires, you are pushing the car. The tires spin because rolling friction is much lower than sliding friction.
In this example, You = Jet Engine
This is silly. Your argument makes no sense, and you have the nerve to imply that I failed physics... :roll:
It has become obvious that the concept of the wheel has eluded you.
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: MrPickins
Originally posted by: smack Down
You can't possibly be serious. Tell me you're just yanking my chain, or that my sarcasm meter is broken.
Of course you can push a car in neutral. Because the wheels are free spinning, just like an airplane's wheels are. How many times can this be pointed out?
The only torque the freespinning wheels of an airplane apply to the axle comes from rolling resistance between the ground and the tire, and in the bearings, the sum of which is so small compared to the force of a jet engine as to be negligible.
Explain why I'm able to move my by rolling the tires backward when in netural but a treadmill can't move a plane backward. Assume the planes egine is off so friction will be working against moving both objects?
You're not rolling the tires, you are pushing the car. The tires spin because rolling friction is much lower than sliding friction.
In this example, You = Jet Engine
This is silly. Your argument makes no sense, and you have the nerve to imply that I failed physics... :roll:
It has become obvious that the concept of the wheel has eluded you.
No, rolling the tire go try it. By applying force to the top of the tire. Go try it and see that you car moves. Just like the treadmill will move the plane or car.
Originally posted by: smack Down
for example, the plane moves 1 mph, the mill moves 1mph, the plane is now moving 2 mph relative to the mill. The plane moves 1mph, the mill moves 2mph, the plane is now moving 3 mphs relative to the mill. and so on and so forth until infinity?
It only goes towards infinity if you assume that the treadmill can't effect the plane. Which is wrong because the treadmill applies torque to the plane.
Originally posted by: MrPickins
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: MrPickins
Originally posted by: smack Down
You can't possibly be serious. Tell me you're just yanking my chain, or that my sarcasm meter is broken.
Of course you can push a car in neutral. Because the wheels are free spinning, just like an airplane's wheels are. How many times can this be pointed out?
The only torque the freespinning wheels of an airplane apply to the axle comes from rolling resistance between the ground and the tire, and in the bearings, the sum of which is so small compared to the force of a jet engine as to be negligible.
Explain why I'm able to move my by rolling the tires backward when in netural but a treadmill can't move a plane backward. Assume the planes egine is off so friction will be working against moving both objects?
You're not rolling the tires, you are pushing the car. The tires spin because rolling friction is much lower than sliding friction.
In this example, You = Jet Engine
This is silly. Your argument makes no sense, and you have the nerve to imply that I failed physics... :roll:
It has become obvious that the concept of the wheel has eluded you.
No, rolling the tire go try it. By applying force to the top of the tire. Go try it and see that you car moves. Just like the treadmill will move the plane or car.
How is pushing the tire with your foot any different than pushing the tires with the engine? In either case your wheel is no longer freespinning.
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: MrPickins
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: MrPickins
Originally posted by: smack Down
You can't possibly be serious. Tell me you're just yanking my chain, or that my sarcasm meter is broken.
Of course you can push a car in neutral. Because the wheels are free spinning, just like an airplane's wheels are. How many times can this be pointed out?
The only torque the freespinning wheels of an airplane apply to the axle comes from rolling resistance between the ground and the tire, and in the bearings, the sum of which is so small compared to the force of a jet engine as to be negligible.
Explain why I'm able to move my by rolling the tires backward when in netural but a treadmill can't move a plane backward. Assume the planes egine is off so friction will be working against moving both objects?
You're not rolling the tires, you are pushing the car. The tires spin because rolling friction is much lower than sliding friction.
In this example, You = Jet Engine
This is silly. Your argument makes no sense, and you have the nerve to imply that I failed physics... :roll:
It has become obvious that the concept of the wheel has eluded you.
No, rolling the tire go try it. By applying force to the top of the tire. Go try it and see that you car moves. Just like the treadmill will move the plane or car.
How is pushing the tire with your foot any different than pushing the tires with the engine? In either case your wheel is no longer freespinning.
And how is that different then pushing it with a treadmill?
Originally posted by: MrPickins
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: MrPickins
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: MrPickins
Originally posted by: smack Down
You can't possibly be serious. Tell me you're just yanking my chain, or that my sarcasm meter is broken.
Of course you can push a car in neutral. Because the wheels are free spinning, just like an airplane's wheels are. How many times can this be pointed out?
The only torque the freespinning wheels of an airplane apply to the axle comes from rolling resistance between the ground and the tire, and in the bearings, the sum of which is so small compared to the force of a jet engine as to be negligible.
Explain why I'm able to move my by rolling the tires backward when in netural but a treadmill can't move a plane backward. Assume the planes egine is off so friction will be working against moving both objects?
You're not rolling the tires, you are pushing the car. The tires spin because rolling friction is much lower than sliding friction.
In this example, You = Jet Engine
This is silly. Your argument makes no sense, and you have the nerve to imply that I failed physics... :roll:
It has become obvious that the concept of the wheel has eluded you.
No, rolling the tire go try it. By applying force to the top of the tire. Go try it and see that you car moves. Just like the treadmill will move the plane or car.
How is pushing the tire with your foot any different than pushing the tires with the engine? In either case your wheel is no longer freespinning.
And how is that different then pushing it with a treadmill?
In your example your foot is applying force through the wheel to the ground, resulting in movement of the car.
In the example of the air plane, the treadmill (your foot) is applying force through the wheel to what?
Originally posted by: AeroEngy
Soemone mentioned they wanted to see a free-body diagram so i created one LINK
You keep talking about torque which would just be the force applied by the treadmill times the radius of the tire. The amount of force is dictated by the friction between the tire and the treadmill surface. This value is easly obtained by a high school level physics equation for rolling friction. Look at the daigram.
Note: All the aircraft data was from an F-16 and can be found on wikipedia. Rolling Friction Coeficient was taken from an ordinary tire form the table in wikipedia(just search for rolling friciton). In the F=m*a equation I had to convert the mass to slugs to make the dimensions consistant. I also only showed the X-componet of all the force vectors because Y- doesn't matter in this case.
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: AeroEngy
Soemone mentioned they wanted to see a free-body diagram so i created one LINK
You keep talking about torque which would just be the force applied by the treadmill times the radius of the tire. The amount of force is dictated by the friction between the tire and the treadmill surface. This value is easly obtained by a high school level physics equation for rolling friction. Look at the daigram.
Note: All the aircraft data was from an F-16 and can be found on wikipedia. Rolling Friction Coeficient was taken from an ordinary tire form the table in wikipedia(just search for rolling friciton). In the F=m*a equation I had to convert the mass to slugs to make the dimensions consistant. I also only showed the X-componet of all the force vectors because Y- doesn't matter in this case.
If you assume the tires can slip then the plane would take off. I'm assuming prefect tires.
Originally posted by: DanTMWTMP
omfg, not this again. It's already known that the plane WILL take off.
The engines are excerting force on the massive amounts of air around it. The gound has NO BEARING whatsoever. The treadmill has to be going at infinite speeds to even have some sort of viable resistence (given that everything is ideal). When any airplane engine is running, there's a HUGE amount of low pressure in front of the plane compared to the back of the engines. Air being sucked in compared to the excess amount of thrust is something that the ground has absolutely no bearing on. It's all about the engines in relation with the air, and not the treadmill/ground/blah.
To personify it, the Engine doesn't give a crap about the treadmill/ground/wheels.
I really do not want to attack any person, but you Mrpicken's your argument makes absolutely no sense. It's not about force excerted against the ground. An airplane has nothing to do with the ground, except it's a place to rest.
Car != Airplane.
Your reality is quite strange.Originally posted by: smack Down
[
My treadmill has no problem going at infinite speeds or faster.
Originally posted by: DanTMWTMP
omfg, not this again. It's already known that the plane WILL take off.
The engines are excerting force on the massive amounts of air around it. The gound has NO BEARING whatsoever. The treadmill has to be going at infinite speeds to even have some sort of viable resistence (given that everything is ideal). When any airplane engine is running, there's a HUGE amount of low pressure in front of the plane compared to the back of the engines. Air being sucked in compared to the excess amount of thrust is something that the ground has absolutely no bearing on. It's all about the engines in relation with the air, and not the treadmill/ground/blah.
To personify it, the Engine doesn't give a crap about the treadmill/ground/wheels.
I really do not want to attack any person, but you Mrpicken's your argument makes absolutely no sense. It's not about force excerted against the ground. An airplane has nothing to do with the ground, except it's a place to rest.
Car != Airplane.
Originally posted by: MrPickins
Originally posted by: DanTMWTMP
omfg, not this again. It's already known that the plane WILL take off.
The engines are excerting force on the massive amounts of air around it. The gound has NO BEARING whatsoever. The treadmill has to be going at infinite speeds to even have some sort of viable resistence (given that everything is ideal). When any airplane engine is running, there's a HUGE amount of low pressure in front of the plane compared to the back of the engines. Air being sucked in compared to the excess amount of thrust is something that the ground has absolutely no bearing on. It's all about the engines in relation with the air, and not the treadmill/ground/blah.
To personify it, the Engine doesn't give a crap about the treadmill/ground/wheels.
I really do not want to attack any person, but you Mrpicken's your argument makes absolutely no sense. It's not about force excerted against the ground. An airplane has nothing to do with the ground, except it's a place to rest.
Car != Airplane.
I'm only disproving Smackdown's idea that the treadmil is relevant. I know full well that the plane takes off.
Originally posted by: Gibsons
Your reality is quite strange.Originally posted by: smack Down
[
My treadmill has no problem going at infinite speeds or faster.
Originally posted by: Gibsons
Your reality is quite strange.Originally posted by: smack Down
[
My treadmill has no problem going at infinite speeds or faster.
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: MrPickins
In your example your foot is applying force through the wheel to the ground, resulting in movement of the car.
In the example of the air plane, the treadmill (your foot) is applying force through the wheel to what?
To what ever is attached to the wheel either a plane or car. So how is my foot rolling a tire and have my car move different then a treadmill rolling a planes tire and have the plane move.
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: AeroEngy
Soemone mentioned they wanted to see a free-body diagram so i created one LINK
You keep talking about torque which would just be the force applied by the treadmill times the radius of the tire. The amount of force is dictated by the friction between the tire and the treadmill surface. This value is easly obtained by a high school level physics equation for rolling friction. Look at the daigram.
Note: All the aircraft data was from an F-16 and can be found on wikipedia. Rolling Friction Coeficient was taken from an ordinary tire form the table in wikipedia(just search for rolling friciton). In the F=m*a equation I had to convert the mass to slugs to make the dimensions consistant. I also only showed the X-componet of all the force vectors because Y-re doesn't matter in this case.
If you assume the tires can slip then the plane would take off. I'm assuming prefect tires.
Originally posted by: MrPickins
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: MrPickins
In your example your foot is applying force through the wheel to the ground, resulting in movement of the car.
In the example of the air plane, the treadmill (your foot) is applying force through the wheel to what?
To what ever is attached to the wheel either a plane or car. So how is my foot rolling a tire and have my car move different then a treadmill rolling a planes tire and have the plane move.
The wheel is freespinning. Nothing is "attatched" to it.
The difference in the example you keep trying to use is that there are two points of contact on the tire, your foot and the ground.
The airplane only has one point of contact, the treadmill. I suppose you could stick your foot on it if you wanted, but it probably wouldn't be a good idea.
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: MrPickins
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: MrPickins
In your example your foot is applying force through the wheel to the ground, resulting in movement of the car.
In the example of the air plane, the treadmill (your foot) is applying force through the wheel to what?
To what ever is attached to the wheel either a plane or car. So how is my foot rolling a tire and have my car move different then a treadmill rolling a planes tire and have the plane move.
The wheel is freespinning. Nothing is "attatched" to it.
The difference in the example you keep trying to use is that there are two points of contact on the tire, your foot and the ground.
The airplane only has one point of contact, the treadmill. I suppose you could stick your foot on it if you wanted, but it probably wouldn't be a good idea.
Wow, you think having two points of contact magicly make a wheel work differently.
Sorry one point of contract means it can't spin with out moving the object attached to the tire.Originally posted by: MrPickins
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: MrPickins
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: MrPickins
In your example your foot is applying force through the wheel to the ground, resulting in movement of the car.
In the example of the air plane, the treadmill (your foot) is applying force through the wheel to what?
To what ever is attached to the wheel either a plane or car. So how is my foot rolling a tire and have my car move different then a treadmill rolling a planes tire and have the plane move.
The wheel is freespinning. Nothing is "attatched" to it.
The difference in the example you keep trying to use is that there are two points of contact on the tire, your foot and the ground.
The airplane only has one point of contact, the treadmill. I suppose you could stick your foot on it if you wanted, but it probably wouldn't be a good idea.
Wow, you think having two points of contact magicly make a wheel work differently.
Having two points of contact makes it no longer freespinning.
You still fail to understand the concept of the wheel.
Are you one of those cavemen from the Geico commercials?