OT: Physics/hydraulics of water and barrel
11-26-2004, 09:50 AM
#211
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Physics/hydraulics of water and barrel
In article <JxX2tWiP5BNp-pn2-Fqg1ddgfMrtd@anon.none.net>,
"Will Honea" <whonea@yahoo.com> wrote:
> By the time this thread is done, it's gonna be to damned cold for the
> OP to want a shower, anyway.
LOL!
In that case we boil a couple gallons of water and add a bucket to the
shower stall to sit on and sponge away!
Thanks All Who Participated. I understand now. I am going to use
engineering instead of physics to solve this. I'll use the top hole in
order not to have to risk losing the whole thing to gravity in a failure
(it's or mine). Apparently the difference between the top and the bottom
are negligable (i know that's not spelled right).
Thanks again.
--
Member AAAAAAAA
American Association Against Acronym Abuse And Also Ambiguity.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
"Will Honea" <whonea@yahoo.com> wrote:
> By the time this thread is done, it's gonna be to damned cold for the
> OP to want a shower, anyway.
LOL!
In that case we boil a couple gallons of water and add a bucket to the
shower stall to sit on and sponge away!
Thanks All Who Participated. I understand now. I am going to use
engineering instead of physics to solve this. I'll use the top hole in
order not to have to risk losing the whole thing to gravity in a failure
(it's or mine). Apparently the difference between the top and the bottom
are negligable (i know that's not spelled right).
Thanks again.
--
Member AAAAAAAA
American Association Against Acronym Abuse And Also Ambiguity.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
11-26-2004, 05:37 PM
#212
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Physics/hydraulics of water and barrel
Tom Greening proclaimed:
> Maybe I'm completely missing something but it seems to me that going in thru
> the top will require less effort. Going in thru the bottom would only
> require less effort until the weight of the water pumped in exceeds the
> weight of the extra water columm if you go in thru the top.
Yup, missing something. It takes exactly the same amount of energy to
pump new water up into a bucket 1 foot wide as it would to pump water
into a huge tank several miles wide. The depth of the water is all
that matters...
>
> For sake of argument, a half full drum of water will exert a fair amount of
> pressure coming out of the bottom bung.
For sake of argument, it would exert pressure exactly equal to the
depth of water as long as the top of the water is open to air.
> Much more than the extra weight of
> the additional water column if filling thru the top or near top side bung.
Nope. Height is pretty much it.
> Going in thru the bottom requires you to overcome the pressure of the water
> trying to exit.
True, but that pressure is less than the pressure of a taller column
of water...
> Imagine trying to fill a town water tower from the bottom
> as opposed to filling it from the top.
Not at all uncommon to do just exactly that.
> Maybe I'm completely missing something but it seems to me that going in thru
> the top will require less effort. Going in thru the bottom would only
> require less effort until the weight of the water pumped in exceeds the
> weight of the extra water columm if you go in thru the top.
Yup, missing something. It takes exactly the same amount of energy to
pump new water up into a bucket 1 foot wide as it would to pump water
into a huge tank several miles wide. The depth of the water is all
that matters...
>
> For sake of argument, a half full drum of water will exert a fair amount of
> pressure coming out of the bottom bung.
For sake of argument, it would exert pressure exactly equal to the
depth of water as long as the top of the water is open to air.
> Much more than the extra weight of
> the additional water column if filling thru the top or near top side bung.
Nope. Height is pretty much it.
> Going in thru the bottom requires you to overcome the pressure of the water
> trying to exit.
True, but that pressure is less than the pressure of a taller column
of water...
> Imagine trying to fill a town water tower from the bottom
> as opposed to filling it from the top.
Not at all uncommon to do just exactly that.
11-26-2004, 05:37 PM
#213
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Physics/hydraulics of water and barrel
Tom Greening proclaimed:
> Maybe I'm completely missing something but it seems to me that going in thru
> the top will require less effort. Going in thru the bottom would only
> require less effort until the weight of the water pumped in exceeds the
> weight of the extra water columm if you go in thru the top.
Yup, missing something. It takes exactly the same amount of energy to
pump new water up into a bucket 1 foot wide as it would to pump water
into a huge tank several miles wide. The depth of the water is all
that matters...
>
> For sake of argument, a half full drum of water will exert a fair amount of
> pressure coming out of the bottom bung.
For sake of argument, it would exert pressure exactly equal to the
depth of water as long as the top of the water is open to air.
> Much more than the extra weight of
> the additional water column if filling thru the top or near top side bung.
Nope. Height is pretty much it.
> Going in thru the bottom requires you to overcome the pressure of the water
> trying to exit.
True, but that pressure is less than the pressure of a taller column
of water...
> Imagine trying to fill a town water tower from the bottom
> as opposed to filling it from the top.
Not at all uncommon to do just exactly that.
> Maybe I'm completely missing something but it seems to me that going in thru
> the top will require less effort. Going in thru the bottom would only
> require less effort until the weight of the water pumped in exceeds the
> weight of the extra water columm if you go in thru the top.
Yup, missing something. It takes exactly the same amount of energy to
pump new water up into a bucket 1 foot wide as it would to pump water
into a huge tank several miles wide. The depth of the water is all
that matters...
>
> For sake of argument, a half full drum of water will exert a fair amount of
> pressure coming out of the bottom bung.
For sake of argument, it would exert pressure exactly equal to the
depth of water as long as the top of the water is open to air.
> Much more than the extra weight of
> the additional water column if filling thru the top or near top side bung.
Nope. Height is pretty much it.
> Going in thru the bottom requires you to overcome the pressure of the water
> trying to exit.
True, but that pressure is less than the pressure of a taller column
of water...
> Imagine trying to fill a town water tower from the bottom
> as opposed to filling it from the top.
Not at all uncommon to do just exactly that.
11-26-2004, 05:37 PM
#214
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Physics/hydraulics of water and barrel
Tom Greening proclaimed:
> Maybe I'm completely missing something but it seems to me that going in thru
> the top will require less effort. Going in thru the bottom would only
> require less effort until the weight of the water pumped in exceeds the
> weight of the extra water columm if you go in thru the top.
Yup, missing something. It takes exactly the same amount of energy to
pump new water up into a bucket 1 foot wide as it would to pump water
into a huge tank several miles wide. The depth of the water is all
that matters...
>
> For sake of argument, a half full drum of water will exert a fair amount of
> pressure coming out of the bottom bung.
For sake of argument, it would exert pressure exactly equal to the
depth of water as long as the top of the water is open to air.
> Much more than the extra weight of
> the additional water column if filling thru the top or near top side bung.
Nope. Height is pretty much it.
> Going in thru the bottom requires you to overcome the pressure of the water
> trying to exit.
True, but that pressure is less than the pressure of a taller column
of water...
> Imagine trying to fill a town water tower from the bottom
> as opposed to filling it from the top.
Not at all uncommon to do just exactly that.
> Maybe I'm completely missing something but it seems to me that going in thru
> the top will require less effort. Going in thru the bottom would only
> require less effort until the weight of the water pumped in exceeds the
> weight of the extra water columm if you go in thru the top.
Yup, missing something. It takes exactly the same amount of energy to
pump new water up into a bucket 1 foot wide as it would to pump water
into a huge tank several miles wide. The depth of the water is all
that matters...
>
> For sake of argument, a half full drum of water will exert a fair amount of
> pressure coming out of the bottom bung.
For sake of argument, it would exert pressure exactly equal to the
depth of water as long as the top of the water is open to air.
> Much more than the extra weight of
> the additional water column if filling thru the top or near top side bung.
Nope. Height is pretty much it.
> Going in thru the bottom requires you to overcome the pressure of the water
> trying to exit.
True, but that pressure is less than the pressure of a taller column
of water...
> Imagine trying to fill a town water tower from the bottom
> as opposed to filling it from the top.
Not at all uncommon to do just exactly that.
11-26-2004, 10:45 PM
#215
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Physics/hydraulics of water and barrel
Jeepers <moomesa@INVALIDfnbnet.net> wrote in message news:<moomesa-CAE34C.08501526112004@news-east.newsfeeds.com>...
> In article <JxX2tWiP5BNp-pn2-Fqg1ddgfMrtd@anon.none.net>,
> "Will Honea" <whonea@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > By the time this thread is done, it's gonna be to damned cold for the
> > OP to want a shower, anyway.
>
> LOL!
>
> In that case we boil a couple gallons of water and add a bucket to the
> shower stall to sit on and sponge away!
>
> Thanks All Who Participated. I understand now. I am going to use
> engineering instead of physics to solve this. I'll use the top hole in
> order not to have to risk losing the whole thing to gravity in a failure
> (it's or mine). Apparently the difference between the top and the bottom
> are negligable (i know that's not spelled right).
>
> Thanks again.
Ah, but for us pedants, there is no such thing as negligible ;-).
Harry K
> In article <JxX2tWiP5BNp-pn2-Fqg1ddgfMrtd@anon.none.net>,
> "Will Honea" <whonea@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > By the time this thread is done, it's gonna be to damned cold for the
> > OP to want a shower, anyway.
>
> LOL!
>
> In that case we boil a couple gallons of water and add a bucket to the
> shower stall to sit on and sponge away!
>
> Thanks All Who Participated. I understand now. I am going to use
> engineering instead of physics to solve this. I'll use the top hole in
> order not to have to risk losing the whole thing to gravity in a failure
> (it's or mine). Apparently the difference between the top and the bottom
> are negligable (i know that's not spelled right).
>
> Thanks again.
Ah, but for us pedants, there is no such thing as negligible ;-).
Harry K
11-26-2004, 10:45 PM
#216
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Physics/hydraulics of water and barrel
Jeepers <moomesa@INVALIDfnbnet.net> wrote in message news:<moomesa-CAE34C.08501526112004@news-east.newsfeeds.com>...
> In article <JxX2tWiP5BNp-pn2-Fqg1ddgfMrtd@anon.none.net>,
> "Will Honea" <whonea@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > By the time this thread is done, it's gonna be to damned cold for the
> > OP to want a shower, anyway.
>
> LOL!
>
> In that case we boil a couple gallons of water and add a bucket to the
> shower stall to sit on and sponge away!
>
> Thanks All Who Participated. I understand now. I am going to use
> engineering instead of physics to solve this. I'll use the top hole in
> order not to have to risk losing the whole thing to gravity in a failure
> (it's or mine). Apparently the difference between the top and the bottom
> are negligable (i know that's not spelled right).
>
> Thanks again.
Ah, but for us pedants, there is no such thing as negligible ;-).
Harry K
> In article <JxX2tWiP5BNp-pn2-Fqg1ddgfMrtd@anon.none.net>,
> "Will Honea" <whonea@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > By the time this thread is done, it's gonna be to damned cold for the
> > OP to want a shower, anyway.
>
> LOL!
>
> In that case we boil a couple gallons of water and add a bucket to the
> shower stall to sit on and sponge away!
>
> Thanks All Who Participated. I understand now. I am going to use
> engineering instead of physics to solve this. I'll use the top hole in
> order not to have to risk losing the whole thing to gravity in a failure
> (it's or mine). Apparently the difference between the top and the bottom
> are negligable (i know that's not spelled right).
>
> Thanks again.
Ah, but for us pedants, there is no such thing as negligible ;-).
Harry K
11-26-2004, 10:45 PM
#217
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Physics/hydraulics of water and barrel
Jeepers <moomesa@INVALIDfnbnet.net> wrote in message news:<moomesa-CAE34C.08501526112004@news-east.newsfeeds.com>...
> In article <JxX2tWiP5BNp-pn2-Fqg1ddgfMrtd@anon.none.net>,
> "Will Honea" <whonea@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > By the time this thread is done, it's gonna be to damned cold for the
> > OP to want a shower, anyway.
>
> LOL!
>
> In that case we boil a couple gallons of water and add a bucket to the
> shower stall to sit on and sponge away!
>
> Thanks All Who Participated. I understand now. I am going to use
> engineering instead of physics to solve this. I'll use the top hole in
> order not to have to risk losing the whole thing to gravity in a failure
> (it's or mine). Apparently the difference between the top and the bottom
> are negligable (i know that's not spelled right).
>
> Thanks again.
Ah, but for us pedants, there is no such thing as negligible ;-).
Harry K
> In article <JxX2tWiP5BNp-pn2-Fqg1ddgfMrtd@anon.none.net>,
> "Will Honea" <whonea@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > By the time this thread is done, it's gonna be to damned cold for the
> > OP to want a shower, anyway.
>
> LOL!
>
> In that case we boil a couple gallons of water and add a bucket to the
> shower stall to sit on and sponge away!
>
> Thanks All Who Participated. I understand now. I am going to use
> engineering instead of physics to solve this. I'll use the top hole in
> order not to have to risk losing the whole thing to gravity in a failure
> (it's or mine). Apparently the difference between the top and the bottom
> are negligable (i know that's not spelled right).
>
> Thanks again.
Ah, but for us pedants, there is no such thing as negligible ;-).
Harry K
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
diesel fuel injection
Jeep Mailing List
3
12-19-2006 05:08 PM
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
