|
|
|
|
|
September 17th, 2005, 03:24 PM
|
|
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 15,630
Thanks: 0
Thanked 30 Times in 18 Posts
|
|
Re: Support That Is Based Outside Of USA
Carbon fiber, fiber glass, composite materials, aluminum, and ceramics. Stronger, lighter, cheaper.
__________________
Creator of the Star Trek Mod - AST Mod - 78 Ship Sets - Conquest Mod - Atrocities Star Wars Mod - Galaxy Reborn Mod - and Subterfuge Mod.
|
September 17th, 2005, 03:38 PM
|
Brigadier General
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Carlisle, UK
Posts: 1,826
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Support That Is Based Outside Of USA
Quote:
Atrocities said:
Carbon fiber, fiber glass, composite materials, aluminum, and ceramics. Stronger, lighter, cheaper.
|
What? No Tin Foil?
This was in no way in reference to the lengths companies will go to so they can preserve their profit margins... Honest Guv
|
September 17th, 2005, 05:32 PM
|
|
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Emeryville, CA
Posts: 1,412
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Support That Is Based Outside Of USA
Quote:
Alneyan said:
Then why not just discard the whole tech support, and put the flow sheet right on the website? So much cheaper, and if it doesn't work... who cares?
Sounds pretty much like your reasoning, when taken just one step further.
|
You've obviously never worked in customer service or tech support. You can't expect basic literacy from the average American consumer, or a grasp of logic, or any real semblance of intelligent thought.
Or maybe I'm just bitter... but I suspect I'm right.
__________________
GEEK CODE V.3.12: GCS/E d-- s: a-- C++ US+ P+ L++ E--- W+++ N+ !o? K- w-- !O M++ V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t- 5++ X R !tv-- b+++ DI++ D+ G+ e+++ h !r*-- y?
SE4 CODE: A-- Se+++* GdY $?/++ Fr! C++* Css Sf Ai Au- M+ MpN S Ss- RV Pw- Fq-- Nd Rp+ G- Mm++ Bb@ Tcp- L+
|
September 17th, 2005, 07:57 PM
|
|
Major
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Searching for a holy grail.
Posts: 1,001
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Support That Is Based Outside Of USA
Quote:
Xrati said:
Actually Phil, the torque load would have deformed the block without the heat. It was a matter of design flaw. The material preformed well within it's specs, the actual stress of the crankshaft and the support of it were the biggest problems. A matter of New concept, Old design!
|
I wasn't saying it was the heat, just that the cooling heat sinks you put into the block weaken the structure. The materials fine, but the structure is weakened by lots of holes in it. Plastics (normally) having piss poor thermal conduction you'd need alot of water content to get the cooling.
It's true I haven't looked at US cars for oh... ever. Me not living there and all.
Most of the cars I see around here are metal bodied. Oh yeah plastic bumpers or whatever, but mainly metal bodies. Could be I'm just spectacularly unfortunate in all the new cars I see.
__________________
He who disagrees with me in private, call him a fool. He who disagrees with me in public, call him an ambulance.
|
September 17th, 2005, 10:02 PM
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,205
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Support That Is Based Outside Of USA
My truck (a 1995 Ford F-150) has metal bumpers, body, everything. But as far as I know, cars are being made of plastic more and more, as are the newer trucks.
Personally, I'd much rather be driving some 1970's-1980's car than a newer car. Why? The metal content. Sure, the plastic car and the metallic car may have similar strengths, etc. But everyone's failed to take into account a very important aspect; inertia. In a heavier vehicle, you will stand a much better chance of survival in the event of a collision with another vehicle, simply due to inertia.
__________________
Courage doesn't always roar. Sometimes courage is that little voice at the end of the day that says "I'll try again tomorrow".
Maturity is knowing you were an idiot in the past. Wisdom is knowing that you'll be an idiot in the future.
Download the Nosral Confederacy (a shipset based upon the Phong) and the Tyrellian Imperium, an organic looking shipset I created! (The Nosral are the better of the two [img]/threads/images/Graemlins/Grin.gif[/img] )
|
September 17th, 2005, 10:22 PM
|
|
First Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Outter Glazbox
Posts: 760
Thanks: 12
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Re: Support That Is Based Outside Of USA
It's pretty simple, the more complex the form of the car, the greater the chance of it being made from plastic or composites. Metal is very hard to form into some of the shapes and contours that are required on some of the new cars. Even with hydro-forming process the cost of molding is cheaper, so far.
|
September 17th, 2005, 10:25 PM
|
|
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Southern CA, USA
Posts: 18,394
Thanks: 0
Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
|
|
Re: Support That Is Based Outside Of USA
El_Phil said:
It's true I haven't looked at US cars for oh... ever. Me not living there and all.
Its the same with Asian cars as well. At least, all of the ones imported here in the US...
|
September 18th, 2005, 01:39 AM
|
|
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,451
Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Re: Support That Is Based Outside Of USA
Quote:
Renegade 13 said:
In a heavier vehicle, you will stand a much better chance of survival in the event of a collision with another vehicle, simply due to inertia.
|
You should try the Red Green Cement Car. Really *really* bad gas milage, but if you're ever in an accident, you win.
__________________
Things you want:
|
September 18th, 2005, 06:01 AM
|
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3,603
Thanks: 0
Thanked 22 Times in 22 Posts
|
|
Re: Support That Is Based Outside Of USA
Quote:
Will said:
You've obviously never worked in customer service or tech support. You can't expect basic literacy from the average American consumer, or a grasp of logic, or any real semblance of intelligent thought.
Or maybe I'm just bitter... but I suspect I'm right.
|
Heh. The whole reasoning goes along the lines of "we don't care about our users", so their unability of getting through the flow sheet would not affect it. It was a "one step further" reasoning, so it does not exactly reflect my own views, opinions...
|
September 18th, 2005, 07:30 AM
|
|
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Emeryville, CA
Posts: 1,412
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Support That Is Based Outside Of USA
Quote:
Renegade 13 said:
Personally, I'd much rather be driving some 1970's-1980's car than a newer car. Why? The metal content. Sure, the plastic car and the metallic car may have similar strengths, etc. But everyone's failed to take into account a very important aspect; inertia. In a heavier vehicle, you will stand a much better chance of survival in the event of a collision with another vehicle, simply due to inertia.
|
With all the science people on these boards, nobody's called bull**** on this yet? The weight of the vehicle does NOT increase the safety. If anything, extra weight makes car more dangerous.
You should recall from Newtonian physics, that inertia is the tendancy of mass to remain at it's current velocity (or speed and heading, if you prefer). When the vehicle is moving, the inertia causes it to keep moving at its current speed until outside forces slow it down. In a wreck, this outside force is applied during a fraction of a second. So, the equation for kinetic energy, E=(0.5)*m*(v^2), says that a vehicle that is twice as heavy will have to withstand twice as much energy on impact. With older cars, the extra weight does not add to the structure of the vehicle overall, and simply adds on to the stress the frame needs to deal with to protect the occupants of the vehicle.
Plastic bumpers, you say? They spread out the time of impact, as the bumper crumples up, absorbing a good percentage of the impact energy. With a metal bumper, there isn't really that much crumpling; it just turns into a metal bar that rams into the frame. The frame of the car would probably deform a metal bumper just as much as the impacted object would in a major crash.
For another way to look at it, think of egg drop contests. You go up to the roof of a moderately tall building (say, between two and four stories), and see what kind of vehicles will allow an egg dropped from that height to not crack. People come up with all sorts of schemes to protect the egg, and most involve either some kind of parachute (reduced speed of impact) or some kind of larger hard shell. But the killer in impact situations is all of the energy is dispersed in a short time period. The trick is to get the decelleration to take as long as possible. The impact can be half the speed of what it would have been without a parachute, and the outer structure could take a lot of energy, but the egg would still break if the decelleration time is 0.001 seconds. But spread out the time to 0.1 seconds, and the egg is intact. That is the route to go for safety.
*/end hijack*
__________________
GEEK CODE V.3.12: GCS/E d-- s: a-- C++ US+ P+ L++ E--- W+++ N+ !o? K- w-- !O M++ V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t- 5++ X R !tv-- b+++ DI++ D+ G+ e+++ h !r*-- y?
SE4 CODE: A-- Se+++* GdY $?/++ Fr! C++* Css Sf Ai Au- M+ MpN S Ss- RV Pw- Fq-- Nd Rp+ G- Mm++ Bb@ Tcp- L+
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|