Biggest difference between a Bentley and a falcon is that a falcon doesn't carry the stigma of being associated with drug dealers and a corrupt politicians.
hes so nice, congratulating the editor and even asking for a pay raise! the editors of these shows are the real in-sung heros. we are all editors on this blessed day. :)
By my estimate, the minimum average power of the trebuchet would have to be ~132 kW or ~178 horsepower. Check my math (and my assumptions). WARNING: No one asked for this much detail. I know that. I was just having fun... :-) Ignoring air resistance (which is less of an issue the denser and smaller in cross-sectional area the projectile is) 45 degrees is the most efficient trajectory. 40 m/s vertical velocity gives us a hang time of ~8 s. 8 s * 40 m/s horizontal gives us 320 m of distance before the projectile hits the ground. Close enough. Total velocity = sqrt((40 m/s)^2 + (40 m/s)^2) = 40 sqrt(2) m/s. Kinetic energy = 0.5 * 90 kg * (40 sqrt(2) m/s)^2 = 144 kJ. Assume that the trebuchet swings in 1 second (a guess, but it's probably more than 0.5 and less than 3 s). Power = 144 kJ / 1s = 144 kW = 193 hp. Or, if you use standard gravity (9.80665 m/s^2) and solve for 300 m, it comes out around 132 kW or 178 hp. But honestly, the actual swing time of the trebuchet will account for a much larger error than my rounding gravity and the velocities. Anyway, this is about the minimum average power through the whole swing. Loses like friction and air resistance and such could add more. And, even without air resistance, the needed power increase dramatically if you deviate from 45 degrees (up or down). (With air resistance the optimum point is lower than 45 degrees, I think, but how much lower depends on the drag coefficient. But even there, deviating from the ideal angle dramatically increases the power required.) For example, staying with no air resistance, a launch angle of 30 degrees or 60 degrees gives you 153 kW (205 hp). 15 or 75 degrees gives you 265 kW (355 hp). 5 or 85 degrees gives you 762 kW (1022 hp). And the closer you get to horizontal or vertical it just keeps shooting off towards infinity because it has less hang time in which to travel 300 m horizontal, so it has to do it faster and faster, hence requiring greater and greater power. Lastly, I'll just comment that this is the average power. If you knew about the speed, angle, and force profile of the trebuchet in detail, you could calculate the peak instantaneous power when it was accelerating the projectile most quickly in the tangential direction. That would be the highest peak power and necessarily substantially higher than these values.
Harleymuun it was a joke. The editor is the one who created the subtitles, and you can’t make out what the host is saying near the end, so the editor is claiming that’s what the host was saying, even though we all know that’s not the case.
+Peter Asbjorn Hansen _liter / meter_ No, horsepower is defined in terms of imperial measure, not metric. I doubt it would be exactly _one_ litre and _one_ metre of anything subjectively very meaningful. I recall, from my UK schooling in the fifties, its being defined as 550 foot pounds per second. Also, +Poop Fingers is right: power is _the rate_ of work being done. You have merely invented a new unit of work or energy here. (Actually, I suspect that you might be joking - but let's not mislead people.) Cheers
+Jack Sainthill wow you remember stuff you learned in the 1950s, dam I was in school in the 1980s and was never taught stuff like that, your generation is the smartest imho. Cheers from Canada.
+Ranjit Very kind, but I'm pretty sure that, for a number of reasons. each successive generation has an overall tendency to be a bit brighter than the previous one. Also, I'm not so sure that imperial scientific units have been taught at all, in schools, in most countries, for some time now - so it's hardly your fault that you don't remember! Best wishes from over here.
"1800s before the industrial revolution. Original Steam Engine. James Watt." There's so many things wrong there, mainly that the steam engine was invented in 1698 and was if I'm correct, a pump for flooded/flooding mines since waterwheels couldn't vertically transport water and buckets weren't efficient enough. James Watt I believe was the inventor if not one of the people to make it work. 1800 was more or less at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, it wasn't called that without a reason, the steam engines powered machinery which increased production which made demand higher which meant more output was required which was why the steam locomotive came around so as to help with increases in productivity but then some people rode the coal wagons and what not and so some guy named George Stephenson saw an opportunity and made passenger "coaches" and made a glorified horse tramline. The Liverpool and Manchester was made a few years later and the Rainhill Trials were held which several entrants were had to see which would run on the Liverpool and Manchester. One was even a horse on a conveyer belt. Three were entered, Rocket, San Pereil, and Novelty, the latter two starting off well but failing later on and so Rocket won. The original locomotive though was made by Richard Trevithick in 1804, I believe it was the Pen-y-darren. Speaking of which the "first steam engine" pictured was an American type (that means 4-4-0), which wasn't around until more towards the middle of the 19th Century. TL;DR This is entirely inaccurate and if James May had done it it would be properly accurate and probably 3 hours 23 minutes longer.
So power is 0:58 "all about how much you can move" but a tractor can move more than a racing car even though the 5:35 racing car has twice as much horsepower. Got it. Not confusing at all.
my grandmother does not understand the most basic math. i told her what this video is about it 20 seconds. she can now explain it to anyone else who does not understand in about the same time.
For metric units it's P = w * T (w for engine speed measured in radians pr. sec and T torque,measured in Nm). Output will therefore be in Watts. Divide it bye 735 and you end up with metric HP (or 745 for imperial HP)
(horsepower ÷ RPM) / 5252 = torque. horsepower does the work, automotive torque is just a ratio, for those people think that horsepower just sell cars and torque wins race's.
Fun fact. A horse power isn't how much power a horse can produce. Well; a horse can produce about 14hp for a short amount of time. Rather, a conventional horsepower is the amount of power a horse can output as an average over a working day #UselessGeneralKnowledge
Na verdade, Work, é termo de mecânica clássica, vinda da física. Onde aqui chamamos de Trabalho, e se dá pela Integral da força produto variação infinitesimal do deslocamento. Quando falamos que Trabalho=Forca x Deslocamento, é algo MT vago, pois só pode ser usado para forcas constantes. Agra quando usamos um termo mais engajado, tal como esse que disse agr, serve para tudo! tudo mesmo! é umas, se n a mais importante das formulas de toda mecânica clássica! N é atoa que Einstein descreveu a famosa E=MC^2 a partir da fórmula do Trabalho.
I have a story: One day two horses are bragging to a donkey that they have 1 horsepower each and the donkey doesn’t have any, the horses turn around when they hear an engine approaching closer and closer and see a ride on lawn mower with the owner of the John Deere X380 saying that there “monster” of a machine has 22 horsepower. The horses aren’t happy that there is something stronger than them but are petrified when they hear the legitimate monster of a machine named a Peterbilt 587 with a person stepping down from the beast looking thing. The proud semi owner announces that his Peterbilt has 500 horsepower. The end. Thanks for reading this short “story” if you would even call it a story.
so let me ask this - if my vette has 400hp but weighs a lot less than my buddy's 465hp much heavier charger, am i still faster? Because eventhough it's less horsepower, it's moving something almost 1,100 pounds lighter right?
this is smtn which iam trying to find out for years .... yes torque menas the pulling power, say 135nm @ 2krpm torque means the engine is able to travel 135meters whem working at 2k rpm ... i still can't understand what hp does to an engine ... more hp means the engine can reach rpms easily amd earlier,say car X has 200hp @ 5k rpm while car Y has 250hp @ 5k assuming all facts and figures associated with both cars are constant and same ... so does car Y reaches 200kmphuch earlier than X takes do reach the same ... please help me
Engineers are basically physicists. Physicists discover stuff and we learn how to use what they discover and in order to do that, a fair knowledge of the subject at hand is advised. Basically the real applied physicists.
1 hp is actually the average power a horse can put out over 8 hours of work. Horses can actually output about 14-17 HP in bursts.
Burst means nothing
That's good info. They should have included that in the video.
@@leelostickun5528 well sprinters would like to argue
We don't count bursts with the exception of selling a product to sound better.
@@joshshin6819 Batteries. Acceleration. The list goes on
"Let's get nerdy for 60 seconds"
I think you mean 7 minutes and 49 seconds mate
And requires a rental Bentley. Your BBC at work!
who else misses when James May was on this channel?
Joe Turner everyone
I mean, this is JAMES’ thing. He was on top gear, and thus, he will forever be known for cars
@@brinley9629 please don't make me cry.
You are retarded
POWWEEEEERRR !
RIP Top Gear
911gp rip topgear but rise the grandtour
To be honest, I'm not fond of The Grand Tour werehas Top Gear was (before 2015) the best Car Show.....In the world.
Oragutan 2002 - 2015
Gewel q
911gp Now the Americans have again remade a show and ruined it. its called the grand tour.
This is excellent physics and really well explained without getting it wrong as so many others do. Many thanks.
Biggest difference between a Bentley and a falcon is that a falcon doesn't carry the stigma of being associated with drug dealers and a corrupt politicians.
It can also go, you know... up.
I hate those a corrupt politicians.
Falcons also don't tend to be massively overweight.
B. Hagedash dam fam lmao
Falcons are associated with blowing a 28-3 lead
hes so nice, congratulating the editor and even asking for a pay raise! the editors of these shows are the real in-sung heros. we are all editors on this blessed day. :)
Speak for ypurself.
@@phxcppdvlazi Learn to spell
I missed this guy. I miss Britlab.
Bring back the old crew more often, theyre the reason I fell in love with this channel.
Cheers @GenuinelyJake! Some more on the way from me very soon!
You replying to that, made my day. That meant a lot to me. Thanks man.
I love how cheeky the guy is who typed up the subtitles for when the sound of the engine cut greg off
I've been riding for years and this has been the most relatable description for why by Tiger 800 has 93 horsepower.
Woah only 26 seconds in and they already answered my question
Don't you just love that British weather. By the way, I loved the nerdy bit.
"I truly believe the editor/animators is the real star of the show. And deserves a massive pay rise"
That car looks so mean with the black rims.
Love it!
so what would the power of a trebuchet be if it launched a 90kg payload over 300m?
1 DEUS to the power of VULT
George Connett in what time?
It would depend on the time it took to travel its full distance.
(Force*distance)/time
By my estimate, the minimum average power of the trebuchet would have to be ~132 kW or ~178 horsepower. Check my math (and my assumptions).
WARNING: No one asked for this much detail. I know that. I was just having fun... :-)
Ignoring air resistance (which is less of an issue the denser and smaller in cross-sectional area the projectile is) 45 degrees is the most efficient trajectory.
40 m/s vertical velocity gives us a hang time of ~8 s.
8 s * 40 m/s horizontal gives us 320 m of distance before the projectile hits the ground. Close enough.
Total velocity = sqrt((40 m/s)^2 + (40 m/s)^2) = 40 sqrt(2) m/s.
Kinetic energy = 0.5 * 90 kg * (40 sqrt(2) m/s)^2 = 144 kJ.
Assume that the trebuchet swings in 1 second (a guess, but it's probably more than 0.5 and less than 3 s).
Power = 144 kJ / 1s = 144 kW = 193 hp.
Or, if you use standard gravity (9.80665 m/s^2) and solve for 300 m, it comes out around 132 kW or 178 hp. But honestly, the actual swing time of the trebuchet will account for a much larger error than my rounding gravity and the velocities.
Anyway, this is about the minimum average power through the whole swing. Loses like friction and air resistance and such could add more.
And, even without air resistance, the needed power increase dramatically if you deviate from 45 degrees (up or down). (With air resistance the optimum point is lower than 45 degrees, I think, but how much lower depends on the drag coefficient. But even there, deviating from the ideal angle dramatically increases the power required.)
For example, staying with no air resistance, a launch angle of 30 degrees or 60 degrees gives you 153 kW (205 hp). 15 or 75 degrees gives you 265 kW (355 hp). 5 or 85 degrees gives you 762 kW (1022 hp). And the closer you get to horizontal or vertical it just keeps shooting off towards infinity because it has less hang time in which to travel 300 m horizontal, so it has to do it faster and faster, hence requiring greater and greater power.
Lastly, I'll just comment that this is the average power. If you knew about the speed, angle, and force profile of the trebuchet in detail, you could calculate the peak instantaneous power when it was accelerating the projectile most quickly in the tangential direction. That would be the highest peak power and necessarily substantially higher than these values.
the subtitles at the end are amazing
Nerdy and imperial measurements do not mix. Use SI guys. Please.
Are imperial measurements inherently not nerdy? It's more likely that Americans were their core audience for this video.
Americans were the core audience of this video even if it was made by a Brit
Joke of the year : Even as an engineer, getting out of the bed is work
6:10 did he say when your neck is stranded in a Quagmire? (giggity)
Yeah as a 3rd year engineer I wouldn't suggest that anyone take too much away from this video.
Everything after about the 5 minute mark is wrong.
"This situation requires one thing.... POWER!!!"
Jeremy Clarkson
last minutes were the best and reason why i search for this explanation
Finally, i know what horsepower is. Thanks.
I tried to figure out the same thing the other day, I'm glad I ran into this vid
Yair you're welcome 😊
I don't watch this channel, this just appeared in my rec. videos for some reason, so I've decided to say ''hi'' to everyone here :)
Greg's back!
Brent Allen *waves*
Not just pulling a man out of a hole, also pulling a Vietnamese out of a chair
Is it just me or is the audio really low alongside him not being very loud?
Yer it was a super windy day so we did the best we could - sorry about that! It was also bloomin' freezing, hence me wearing gloves like a wimp.
best video to clear the concept of hp
Since they are now part of the BBC this would make sense, but was this the topgear test track?
Why does the editor deserve a raise when he/she forgot to add the in-video links for the falcon video and subscription at the end? :P
i think its because you cant add those links until the video is uploaded
Doggo117100 you can
Harleymuun it was a joke. The editor is the one who created the subtitles, and you can’t make out what the host is saying near the end, so the editor is claiming that’s what the host was saying, even though we all know that’s not the case.
@@CinematicTechnologies he is aware of that... he's being sarcastic
Very good explanation Ben.
I used to wonder and ponder What is horsepower? But now i know the true meaning!
Who's watched this video and still doesnt have a clue what horse power means !
"Break" horsepower ya brit haha sweet video man, keep it up!
*Brake
good presentation
It's amazing he could do that in one take :o impressive
Adrian Mei there are visible cuts throughout the video
maybe you should put more horsepower in that microphone you're using, i can barely hear anything
or yeah, raise the pay to editor and get him to check audio after editing
oreskec 🤣💀
oreskec or turn up ur volume smh
@@oreskec maybe it's your ears that need the horsepower
The question is how quickly could you haul 1 man out of a 10 metre mineshaft with 109,000 hp?
I barely can hear something
Mohammed Ahmed you barely can english
I could not concentrate on a word this old man was saying
Turn up your volume lol
Use captions
to an engineer getting out of bed is work. Love it!
I thought 1 horsepower was the average work of a horse in a day, and at in short bursts, a single horse could produce upto 15 horsepower
Top video mate.
(Torque x RPM) / 5252
Horsepower is the power 1 horse uses to drag 1 liter of boiling water 1 meter.
In how much time?
+Peter Asbjorn Hansen
_liter / meter_
No, horsepower is defined in terms of imperial measure, not metric.
I doubt it would be exactly _one_ litre and _one_ metre of anything subjectively very meaningful.
I recall, from my UK schooling in the fifties, its being defined as 550 foot pounds per second.
Also, +Poop Fingers is right: power is _the rate_ of work being done. You have merely invented a new unit of work or energy here.
(Actually, I suspect that you might be joking - but let's not mislead people.)
Cheers
+Jack Sainthill wow you remember stuff you learned in the 1950s, dam I was in school in the 1980s and was never taught stuff like that, your generation is the smartest imho. Cheers from Canada.
+Ranjit
Very kind, but I'm pretty sure that, for a number of reasons. each successive generation has an overall tendency to be a bit brighter than the previous one.
Also, I'm not so sure that imperial scientific units have been taught at all, in schools, in most countries, for some time now - so it's hardly your fault that you don't remember!
Best wishes from over here.
Ranjit cheers from northern Ontario
It is kinda wierd to call it "Horsepower" since there's no specific horse as reference.
makes a great short podcast
I love Britain's weather !! ♡ 😍
5:03 like if u thought he was gonna say "no"
The car and coat don't make your banter any more interesting than a glass of water
Spaghetti Face Well, just pray that he doesn't meet ur gf, she'd have a different opinion.
Are you just mad because he's already gotten to yours?
thanks for clear explanation
I subbed
Hey! Getting out of bed sometimes is hard work alright?
Horse Power what a interesting combination of words for a professional use.
nerdy bit should never end
Renato E deal
I instantly clicked this after I read the thumbnail. LOL.
6:12, wrong, the thing that converts the power to torque is the gears, you can theoretically use the same engine to build a car.
This is awesome
"1800s before the industrial revolution. Original Steam Engine. James Watt." There's so many things wrong there, mainly that the steam engine was invented in 1698 and was if I'm correct, a pump for flooded/flooding mines since waterwheels couldn't vertically transport water and buckets weren't efficient enough. James Watt I believe was the inventor if not one of the people to make it work. 1800 was more or less at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, it wasn't called that without a reason, the steam engines powered machinery which increased production which made demand higher which meant more output was required which was why the steam locomotive came around so as to help with increases in productivity but then some people rode the coal wagons and what not and so some guy named George Stephenson saw an opportunity and made passenger "coaches" and made a glorified horse tramline. The Liverpool and Manchester was made a few years later and the Rainhill Trials were held which several entrants were had to see which would run on the Liverpool and Manchester. One was even a horse on a conveyer belt. Three were entered, Rocket, San Pereil, and Novelty, the latter two starting off well but failing later on and so Rocket won. The original locomotive though was made by Richard Trevithick in 1804, I believe it was the Pen-y-darren. Speaking of which the "first steam engine" pictured was an American type (that means 4-4-0), which wasn't around until more towards the middle of the 19th Century. TL;DR This is entirely inaccurate and if James May had done it it would be properly accurate and probably 3 hours 23 minutes longer.
so, why in france the value of HP is diferent??? (Citroen 2cv have more than 2 horse power!)
Where'd you get that coat, I like it
I'd love to work for Earth Lab and make videos like this when I'm older
did they hire you?
Well explained
Today I discovered that BBC has a sense of humour 😂
indeed we do :) Sometimes ;)
A small one but it's there
So power is 0:58 "all about how much you can move" but a tractor can move more than a racing car even though the 5:35 racing car has twice as much horsepower. Got it. Not confusing at all.
70 kilos lifted 1meter high in one second = 1 horse power
U explained it better than him in a few words, thank you.
Mihai Str what about gravitation ?
This guy needs be a top gear presenter asap.
YES PLEASE! Can I use you as a reference?
Greg Foot Go right ahead
5mins to get to a point I can make to my grandmother in 20seconds.
my grandmother does not understand the most basic math. i told her what this video is about it 20 seconds. she can now explain it to anyone else who does not understand in about the same time.
#tested
Torque x RPM
fin.
Divided by 5252
Josh Sisson nope
faisal3398 *assuming imperial units. For metric, it's, er... something else.
For metric units it's P = w * T (w for engine speed measured in radians pr. sec and T torque,measured in Nm). Output will therefore be in Watts. Divide it bye 735 and you end up with metric HP (or 745 for imperial HP)
Josh Sisson 2πTN!!!
And the formula to calculate HP is HP=TorqueXRPM/5252.
(horsepower ÷ RPM) / 5252 = torque. horsepower does the work, automotive torque is just a ratio, for those people think that horsepower just sell cars and torque wins race's.
nice accent and great content
Fun fact. A horse power isn't how much power a horse can produce. Well; a horse can produce about 14hp for a short amount of time. Rather, a conventional horsepower is the amount of power a horse can output as an average over a working day #UselessGeneralKnowledge
Na verdade, Work, é termo de mecânica clássica, vinda da física. Onde aqui chamamos de Trabalho, e se dá pela Integral da força produto variação infinitesimal do deslocamento. Quando falamos que Trabalho=Forca x Deslocamento, é algo MT vago, pois só pode ser usado para forcas constantes. Agra quando usamos um termo mais engajado, tal como esse que disse agr, serve para tudo! tudo mesmo! é umas, se n a mais importante das formulas de toda mecânica clássica! N é atoa que Einstein descreveu a famosa E=MC^2 a partir da fórmula do Trabalho.
in dutch its called "Paardenkracht" Paard=Horse and Kracht=Power.
One sad thing about this video is that we in our modern age can no longer use 40 horses at once to move something
It ACTUALLY starts at 2:30, you're welcome.
Cheers mate!
why is the ps unit be described as horse power in SI unit?
can you use IS?
Great video Greg! Good to see you back! :)
I think it is fairly universally accepted now that lots of cake IS NOT a good thing
I have a story: One day two horses are bragging to a donkey that they have 1 horsepower each and the donkey doesn’t have any, the horses turn around when they hear an engine approaching closer and closer and see a ride on lawn mower with the owner of the John Deere X380 saying that there “monster” of a machine has 22 horsepower. The horses aren’t happy that there is something stronger than them but are petrified when they hear the legitimate monster of a machine named a Peterbilt 587 with a person stepping down from the beast looking thing. The proud semi owner announces that his Peterbilt has 500 horsepower. The end.
Thanks for reading this short “story” if you would even call it a story.
This guy is just defining the word horsepower ..
Why did he say that this part was 'nerdy'? Because that's basic knowledge and everyone with a somewhat alright education should know that.
It's the amount of horses available to be fitted for war!
Oh this could be a cool video. *clicks on it* *ears explode and he dies*
that bentley is beautiful.
"We're going back to the 1800's before the industrial revolution ever started"?????
in a few words its a tug of war. 800 horse vs 800 horse car the result will be a DRAW
so let me ask this - if my vette has 400hp but weighs a lot less than my buddy's 465hp much heavier charger, am i still faster? Because eventhough it's less horsepower, it's moving something almost 1,100 pounds lighter right?
You should check out what a combined 4500bhp does for an HST over there in the UK.
Throughout the whole video, all I wanted was him to just move the side so I can see the car behind him.
haha sorry about that! Beautiful car!!
20th Century Boys brought me here. Kenji mentioned horsepower and I got curious lol
2.4128 is the most horsepower you can get out of u.s socket and 4.1823 are the most you can get out of a u.k socket?
as someone who knows physics, these engineering terms are... painfull. And no mention of momentum? acceleration? resistance?
Tbh I can't get passed the units... Foot pounds? Might as well be hand tonnes wtf does it even mean.
Great work bro. But Your voice is completely inaudible, even with full volume difficult to hear.
Explain what is Torque in a car way please!
this is smtn which iam trying to find out for years .... yes torque menas the pulling power, say 135nm @ 2krpm torque means the engine is able to travel 135meters whem working at 2k rpm ... i still can't understand what hp does to an engine ... more hp means the engine can reach rpms easily amd earlier,say car X has 200hp @ 5k rpm while car Y has 250hp @ 5k assuming all facts and figures associated with both cars are constant and same ... so does car Y reaches 200kmphuch earlier than X takes do reach the same ... please help me
I liked the ending.. LOL!!
Calculating work is more physics than engineering
Engineers are basically physicists. Physicists discover stuff and we learn how to use what they discover and in order to do that, a fair knowledge of the subject at hand is advised. Basically the real applied physicists.