Re: Senza Lavoro part 2, Long & wordy

[brian whatcott <inet@intellisys.net>]

At 05:05 11/14/97 -0800, you wrote:
> Bob Sciamanda's extension of his MET (or what others have called 
> the pseudowork-energy theorem, PET?) to include the concept of 
> potential energy is certainly correct.... 
> A. John Mallinckrodt 

Feel free to ignore this commentary - which requests only a worked example...

I follow several newsgroups.
A person wanted to size the mass of an inertia wheel for an inertial engine
dynamometer last week.
He wanted to permit HP measurements to 100HP at up to 10,000 RPM allowing a
10% rise in rotation rate over 10 seconds.

I assumed all flywheel mass concentrated in the rim.
I equated the work input to the extra distance the rim moved at 10000rpm + 10%
in 10 secs.
 This did not compare with the difference of the beginning to ending
kinetic energy of the rim.
 I hastily computed 800 lbs.for the rim. I'm fairly confident this was wrong.

If anyone is motivated to work this example ( assuming it is a suitable
candidate,) I would be glad.

Sincerely

brian whatcott <inet@intellisys.net>
Altus OK