Solve ADVANCED Productive Copy.sm (327kb) downloaded 45 time(s).

An example of how the Pitot tube and Mach number are used in industrial instrumentation, not only for aeronautical. From Potter & Wiggert, Fluids Mechanics, Schaum Series, Example 9.6



Best regards.
Alvaro.

My intention is not to be an opposing force but actually they are. You have noticed the irregularity via using SI units.
Problem is not "using SI units", it is "not using SI units".


By to look of page design, my diagnosis is lazy LaTeX writing. I agree, author should be more careful.

The demo is neutral about solving on the canvas.
Publish more/adapt ... for Smath Community.

I have no idea how many mistakes things I've uploaded or written here can have. But I remember several times that I have corrected some of them. Once I made a mistake in making a triangle in 3 dimensions, and I don't remember if it was Fridel, Martin, Davide or who corrected it but without saying that I was wrong. I also remember several mistakes of mine about RPM and temperature units. Another mistake that I remember well was when Sergio (Pompelmo) made several observations to me in a Newton-Raphson solver because it was quite poorly done and with errors, and the truth is that it was hard for me to see where I had made a mistake, but he was very patient, giving me time to that I could see it. Another gentleman. But I don't recall ever saying that my proposals were neutral rather than wrong. These bugs on Colebrook, Atmospheric Air, Pitot, Mach number, Power and Energy, Poisse... are several years old, over a decade old. That and your disrespect for the native cultures of your own country led me to exhaust my patience and I should abandon all conception of neutrality.

Best regards.
Alvaro.

That's the point: You don't.

In spanish we say "sostenella y no enmendalla" ( http://etimologias.dechi...stenella-y-no-enmendalla ). Torque have dimensions of energy, but in your pseudo scientific unitless world, it has units of force



Martin help there. You only insist on the misuse of the units, whatever the system (SI, CGS, MKS, FPS, ENG, ...). You have helped me several times, but precisely not in the case of torque. I remember for example your help with selecting points on a graph, in the Mathcad forum. I also remember asking Mona to delete a post of yours because of the things you said, and I decided then to forget that incident.

But there is no way to explain to you that the units of torque are not kgf, nor those of the Mach number kph, nor the differences between static and dynamic viscosity, nor many other things: "sostenella y no enmendalla"

Best regards.
Alvaro.

Pretty sure those are not typo. You don't know how to work with units, simple as that.
Most of your calculations has that mistakes, you even despise people who told you to correct your failures.
If those were just typos any sane person should have been corrected after 4-6 years.
On the contrary you are still snubbing everyone and posting your full of mistakes samples.
Worse, when you are cornered you simply draw "billion dollar nuclear plant and golden bridge award" card.

I will continuously say you are not a good engineer, simple as that. And your mistake are not typos.
Because, you still wrote Mach = .. kph or kgf/m for torque unit or force. Unclear over there.
NEITHER IT IS NOT!!! It is N*m for torque, N for force, m for distance. (or 1kgf for 9.807N)
Mach number has no units, it doesn't have kph for unit. IT IS JUST A NUMBER!!!
You should also correct your kW/hr mistake for power (W) too, also cP usage instead of cSt.

I feel sometimes I am talking to a wall.

It helps to see new users how horribly erroneus your calculations are.
I am sure of it, deal with it. You will be addressed every time you blather.

In fact, all the messages of almost all of them (except one in particular) are very useful, thank you very much to all of them except one.