First Generation Firebird-L Mailing List Re: physics 160 book v.s. common sense (Roy) by "Steve" <poncho68sa@hotmail.com> Re: physics 160 book v.s. common sense by "Steve" <poncho68sa@hotmail.com>
(back) Subject: Re: physics 160 book v.s. common sense (Roy) From: "Steve" <poncho68sa@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 02:55:32 -0500 dude, mellow out.people are allowed to have fun on the list. do not take = it so personal. i think he was remarking on your book not you. damb...... ----- Original Message ----- From: danny <dannyboylll@qwest.net> To: First Generation Firebird-L <Firebird-L@oakmediacreations.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 12:44 AM Subject: RE: physics 160 book v.s. common sense (Roy) > First Generation Firebird-L Mailing List > = ......................................................................... > hey ROY you don't have to call me an egghead bookworm. i'm sorry, but i > don't think that you know me so you don't need to be insulting me. i = would > never insult someone that i didn't know. i am sorry if you don;t like my > posts. if you really don't like what i say just delete the email. or have > me kicked off the list. its that easy. i thought the topic was an > interesting one i am sorry that you don't think the same. OK... now i will > answer your example. you have a very good point. and yes my example = did > exclude many variables. i am sure that temperature of the tire makes a huge > difference (burnouts raise this) the surface of the road can very = greatly. > but one thing you mentioned was that the surface of the road would = provide > less traction if the small grooves and holes were filled with melted = tire > rubber. I have been out of the "labratory" a few times (been going to > dragraces for 12 years) and i have noticed that the point on the strip where > the cars launch seems very smooth from the hundreds and hundreds of launches > that have occured there. so would a car launch better on the surface of > that dragstrip or would it be faster at a normal stop light that didn't have > that smooth surface? -danny 68 400 coupe. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Firebird-L@oakmediacreations.com > [mailto:Firebird-L@oakmediacreations.com]On Behalf Of ROY D LUMSDEN > Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 7:50 PM > To: First Generation Firebird-L > Subject: Re: physics 160 book v.s. common sense > > > First Generation Firebird-L Mailing List > = ......................................................................... > That was another typical "theoretical" response from some egghead book worm > who has never ventured outside his test lab. What he says is true if no > other factors are used. But, let's look at the history of drag racing. = The > first "slicks" were truck tires that had the grooved tread shaved off. They > used these for a number of reasons. Two of the reasons were: one, the taller > tires added gearing to final drive ratio and; two, they were wider and > spread the load over a large area to -- gain traction. > > "Huh?" you say, "How did number two work?" . > > Well, let's look at the road surface. It's not perfectly smooth like the > laboratory table, as a mater of fact, it's rather rough and porous. A = thin > tire will spin and the road surface will fill with rubber from the = melting > tire, when the pores are full of hot melted rubber, the surface tension > (i.e., friction) is reduced and grip is lost. However, if you spread = that > over a larger area (i.e., reduce the surface tension per square inch by > spreading the pressure), it takes longer to fill and the surface tension is > maintained longer. The longer you can maintain the surface tension, the > faster you'll launch. Theories are for perfect worlds... not = practicality. > > Roy > > > >
(back) Subject: Re: physics 160 book v.s. common sense From: "Steve" <poncho68sa@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 03:00:43 -0500 unless of course you wrote the book. ----- Original Message ----- From: danny <dannyboylll@qwest.net> To: First Generation Firebird-L <Firebird-L@oakmediacreations.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 2:36 AM Subject: physics 160 book v.s. common sense > First Generation Firebird-L Mailing List > = ......................................................................... > i have come across something very interesting and troubling in my = physics > book. i am a sophomore physics major in albuquerque new mexico and = there is > a paragraph in my physics book that claims that tire width and diamater has > nothing to do with traction!!!!!! > AND I QUOTE > "Friction does not depend on the area of contact. so those extra wide tires > you see on some cars provide no more friction than narrower tires. the > wider tire simply spreads the weight of the car over a greater area to > reduce heating and wear. simaliarly the friction between a truck and = the > ground is the same weather the truck has 4 tires or 18. more tires = spread > the load over more of a ground area and reduce the pressure per tire. > interestingly stopping distance when brakes are applied is not effected = by > the # of tires, but the wear that the tires experience." > > i found this very interesting. it is in black and white in my physics book, > so i have to believe it. now i know that a softer tire will grip the = road > better, and will not last as long. and the springy sidewalls of slicks will > absorb some of the launch energy and release it later when the tire s = have > more traction, but it seems common sense that a wider tire would have = more > traction. well then again 500 years ago common sense would tell you = that > the earth was flat..... :>) > > -danny 68 400 coupe. new mex. > >