Archive for October, 2012

20
Oct
12

A Bit of Automobile Physics

A couple days ago, I sat down to write a physics problem that would quantitatively illustrate the concept of power to my students.  Those of you with some physics education know that power is work done per time or the rate of consumption/expenditure of energy.  Here’s the setup:  the proud owner of a new Porsche 911 Turbo S* decides to test Porsche’s claim that the car will achieve 60 mph (~27 m/s) in a mere 3.1 seconds.  The approximate mass of the car is 1350 kg.  Determine the average power that will achieve this goal.  The problem can be done in a couple ways, but the simplest is to apply the work-energy theorem, which equates the net work done on the car to its change in kinetic energy.  Kinetic energy is 0.5*mass*velocity^2.  Go through this calculation, and the result is about 160kW or about 210 horsepower.

On the face of it, this is pretty standard introduction to physics stuff.  Nice and simple.  Illustrates how to use the new equation for power they’ve just been shown and relates it to something in the real world.  For me (and hey, maybe my students too once I talked about it**), the interesting bit is when the result is compared to the horsepower rating that Porsche gives to their engine, which is 530hp.  Now, Porsche isn’t lying.  These things can be checked, and often are.  The big difference between the two figures comes from a couple of things:  (1) Our calculation incorporates all the other forces acting on the car during its 0-60mph sprint.  Drag and contact rolling friction are forces which oppose the propulsive force delivered from the engine to the wheels, and what we’re reading out (210 hp) is the propulsion minus those energy sapping effects.  (2) 530 hp is, at least as far as I can tell, brake horsepower, which is the power that the engine delivers directly to the output shaft.  From there, bits and pieces of that power are used up by all sorts of things before it ever gets translated to the wheels.  Power steering, air conditioning, fuel pump, water pump, alternator, frictional losses in the transmission, the differential, etc, etc…all these get a piece.  All these effects combined take us from 530 hp at the engine to 210 hp “on the road” so-to-speak.

But wait, you say, that isn’t so bad!  We’re still about 40% efficient in terms of translating raw engine power to the road even with all those parasitic effects!  Indeed, that is a testament to the engineering prowess of Porsche (or any other major car company).  Of course, the real inefficiencies come from the fact that we’re using a heat engine to produce that 530hp in the first place.  I’ll write a follow-up on that subject whenever I get a little sad about heat engines not being in the curriculum*** for Physics 100 at Cal Maritime.

* If you’ve got a spare $160,000, you too could be the proud (and possibly broke) owner of this car.

** Hope springs eternal.

*** Physicist rage!!!

08
Oct
12

Enjoying Some Adult Beverages

I have recently been enjoying the powerful brews of the North Coast Brewing Company.  These guys hail from Fort Bragg, CA, and in my opinion make one of the finest line-ups in the microbrew industry.  I’ll limit myself to what I’ve tried:  the Old Stock Ale, the Brother Thelonious Belgian Style Abbey Ale, the Old Rasputin Russian Imperial Stout, the Le Merle Belgian Style Farmhouse Ale, the Pranqster Belgian Style Golden Ale, the Red Seal Ale, and the Scrimshaw Pilsner.  There’s a few others, but I haven’t seen them, and the just-a-bit-too-long three hour pilgrimage to the actual brewery means that I haven’t tried their “Barrel-Aged” varieties.  (I think I’ve got my lovely wife sold on going up there sometime though, so stay tuned.)  Anyway, they are all very good.  If I had to pick a least favorite, it would be the Pranqster, partially because of the odd-ball name, but mostly because I don’t think it stands out, particularly when compared to the Le Merle.  Sure, they’re slightly different styles, but at least from my experience, Le Merle captures a lot more of what it’s attempting to emulate, i.e. the Belgians and their oh-so-tasty-but-oh-so-expensive golden ales.  If I had to pick a favorite, it would probably be ‘the Brother’.  A bottle of that stuff, and well, the Brother starts talking to me.  So to speak.  It’s in the dark, ‘dubbel’ style, and it is very strong without being too alcohol-y.  Great label art as well.  To my taste, it might benefit from a little more carbonation, but I suppose adjusting that part of the brewing process might get rid of all those delightful flavors that it currently possesses.  Not that I would know.

Along those lines, it has occurred to me, that despite drinking and, most of time, enjoying beer with some regularity, I know only a little about it.  You know, the brewer guy takes some malt and some water, boils it, adds hops at some point, waits some period of time (longer for lagers), and voila, there be beer.  Simple.  Of course, at this level, when I drink a bad beer*, there’s very little in the way of critical thought about why it is bad beyond, “Ugh.  Won’t get that one again.”  I’m going to try and give specific beers and the science behind beer a semi-regular slot on this blog.  I hope readers will find those future installments of interest.  In the meantime, go buy yourself a bottle of Brother Thelonious and let him speak to you as well.

* Pick any “macro” brew that isn’t ice-cold for an example of this.  Or Dogfish Head’s ‘Black and Red’ that they brought to the Portland Brewfest a couple years back.  Blech.