User:wdl1961

Contributions before having an account:
Wdl24.146.23.84

Userboxes

This user has visited 50 of the 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.

50

:

started new articles

articles worked on

Diesel engine
Hot bulb engine
Diesel car history
Diesel generator
Diesel locomotive
Torque converter $r\,N^{2}D^{5}$ ----> $r\,N^{5}D^{2}$ ,

few facts

3x father and 2x grandfather
born in amsterdam ,mokum
catholic grade school.
no highschool.
bought "dieselmotoren voor automobielen" 1943.
machinist on hot bulb engines 1945
car mechanic
airplane mechanic 1946
strike breaker to commie mokum longshoreman union strike 3wks huray.
inland boat diesel engineer
underground one mile deep coalmine mechanic 20 days nuts
diesel mechanic deep sea.suez canal 8 times .indonesia usa east and west coast. calcuta etc.
swam in the bitter lakes egypt but never walked in africa.
around the world seattle to seattle wash. 1952.proved to me earth is not flat.
machinist.lathe milling shaper
usarmy 1954
GED highschool and GED 1 yr college 1954 on army post in three hours
landingcraft mecanic.(pfc) fireboat captain.
us citizen seoul korea 1956.
draftsman boeing 707,B-52,KC-135
college mech engr. on the G.I. Bill.
diesel engr tugboat to alaska seattle dewline bering sea hawai 1957
switched major to electrical engineering uw 1958.reason el.engrs pretended to be smarter.
parttime boeing.
elected into Tau Beta Pi engr. honor society.1960
bs degree el engr march 1961.
installed and debugged missile visual tracking equipment Nike Zeus anti missile system on Kwajalein Marshall isl.
now called Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site
write premission checkout programs in binary replaced failing transistors on worlds fastest computer 200.000 add /sec to 400kc adds etc.later 1961 with 25 k transistors.
install checkout and write checkout programs for those computors. no hardware fp. assembler operating system but had hardware square root instr. and interupts.
bought my first diesel car1965.never owned a gasoline car since.
system analist (card duplicator mostly ) AUTEC - Atlantic Undersea Test and Evaluation Center andros island bahamas 1966.
find hardware and software problems and hydrophone loc.two miles under water. radar loc. were known by looking. bypass faulty data without using a kalman^[1] filter in two days.
checkout range and computer pr. by tracking airplanes and navy destroyers.
recognized my (2000 th) great grandfather in the Neanderthal exibition in the museum of nat. history lineup nyc.
overhauled my diesel, new pistons, bearings ,timing chain and replaced bend piston rod
chirp radar analysis nike zeus.solve buchholz circular waveguide eq."Annalen der Physik" on contract with btl Bell Telephone Laboratories 1970.
gun fire conrol and diesel eng. on the M1 Abrams and M109A6 Paladin gun usarmy.
drove my diesel(with +200.000 miles) from pa. to alaska.
drove my diesel to Pikes Peak Colorado 14,110 feet (4,301 m).no smoke going up !lots of white smoke going down.
retired 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------

perfecrst

i may not be perffect (anymore). but still trying wth 11.560345278093114207892% i had a looo-------oong time ago i am trying to remmember.
this proves i could pprevilously computer program too mostly wth 0110001010010 or 470021o6745 relation to eight ball).
pi=3.14159 26535 89793 23846 26433 83279 50288 41971 69399 37510 58209 74944 59230 78164 06286 20899 86280 34825 34211 70679 82148 08651 32823 06647 09384 46095 50582 23172 53594 08128 48111 74502 84102 70193 85211 05559 64462 29489 54930 38196 44288 10975 66593 34461 28475 64823 37867 83165 27120 19091 45648 56692 34603 48610 45432 66482 13393 60726 02491 41273
+/- 0.0001
never needed more
---------------------------------------------------------------------

opinions (mostly quotes)

my favorates "' i used to work for a living before i became an intellectual.""
i hate fanatics. they should be shot.
i hate typing.love copying and duping.
keep it simple, stupid.
if you go to hell i will be waiting for you .
50% of people are below average.
ref opion is more reliable than my experience?
my defs
all = > 94.999999999999999999999999%
mostly = > 49.999999999999999999999999999%
non=< 1.00000000000000000000000001%
person claims to be non biased = stupid or lying .
if you are 5 and dont speak mokums you'r brainwashed .
i speak english with an accent.
i speak mokums with an accent.
i speak dutch with an english and mokums accent.
usually i know what a word means. just cant name the language.
pls vandalize my stuff.i want to be red and feel important.
the other side is (not) always totally stupid.
complexity hides stupidity.(proof windows).
stupidity can be hidden with complexity (some wicki articles) .
every bug is trivial (after finding it).
every invention is trivial (after developing it).(proof akroyd - diesel)
there is no equipment like no equipment proof [[ ]]

more

a good nose is faster than long research.
long research pays more than a good nose.
every project is at least 95% finished and working, just ask.(proof akroyd - diesel,windows)
every project is at least 95% finished and working i worked on , just ask.(proof xxxxxx,xxxxxx)
you can usually find what you are looking for.
reality does not exist, only perception.
make ignorant people think and they will hate you.
if it aint broke dont fix it.
give a guy a new hammer, everything looks like a nail.
all,never ,none ,everybody are usually wrong or eventually will be.
if god did not exist he would have been invented.
evolution, he would not do it in one day either.
never say never.
if you dont put your name on it, dont bother
if he did not put his name on it, dont bother
narrow mindedness * iq = k
industry expert knows everything about nothing
government expert knows nothing about everything

visited

Netherlands *
Germany *
Belgium
France
Switzerland
Italy
England
Egypt (swam only)
India
Ceylon
Indonesia
Malaya
Singapore
Phillipines
Japan *
USA *
Canada *
Mexico
Marshall isl *
Bahamas *
Korea *
* more than one month

*

References

^ Kalman, R.E. (1960). "A new approach to linear filtering and prediction problems". Journal of Basic Engineering 82 (1): 35–45. Retrieved on 2008-05-03.

/refer
/sandbox1

/zandbox2

/sandbox3
/sandbox4

veriviability

Verifiability list for an invention template (no thinking required):

First nationality or culture with the idea for qqqq.

First one to make a drawing.

First one to get an patent.

First one to publish his results.

First one to build one.

First to have it work at all .

First to have it work for more than xx minutes.

First one that uses zzz material.

First to have one that is practical.

First one that is a commercial success .

No claims are made for completeness of the list but feel free to expand it.

No claims are made this applies to anything other than machines.

Any of the above will work especially if it is your corner (nationality)

Wdl1961 (talk) 03:15, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Wdl1961 (talk) 13:01, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

mist

tags without reason and usually placed by an unidentified user
they seem to be placed mostly by prejudiced (re)form school boys from certain places are placed on articles from certain sources
ratio no words/no refs is valid for tag
some editors can read the article and all references and evaluate and correlate all information in in one minute.realy
checking in the originators background their experience seems mostly to be in removing curses and porn and changing commas and semicolons.
remove tags and it is an insult to the originator
supposedly it is not insulting to the numerous people looking at it with more experience and education than the tag originator possesses.
try reading the material first including all the refs and linked material and correlate
tag the specific item and give a reason in the talk page with conflicting ref.
a tag without a name of originator and specific identified reason should be removed as vandalism
---------------------------------------------------------------------

under wiki rules photographs refs and drawings from multiple sources are not more reliable than third parties quotes and opinions ??
---------------------------------------------------------------------

source

Can material be challenged not for being wrong or inaccurate, but simply for not being sourced? I have a question about this policy. My understanding is that WP:V does NOT state that all content must be cited to WP:RS. Instead, it says that material challenged or likely to be challenged requires reliable sources. If material is factually accurate but not sourced, that does that mean it should automatically be removed? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 15:09, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Editors who make a habit of removing material that is generally known to be factually accurate, with no claim the material is inaccurate, just because there is no citation, should be banned. Editors who habitually make absurd challenges just to be a pain in the ass should be banned. --Jc3s5h (talk) 15:44, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

There is no requirement that you must remove something you believe is accurate. On the other hand, if anyone else questions it, the statement will need to be sourced. So best practice says that if you find something that could be sourced, try to find a source for it, if only to protect it from being challenged. Blueboar (talk) 15:46, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

what is good for the goose should be good for the gander.ref >ruk.ca/article/2841
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments by other users consensus : look in mirror and that is two

sockpuppet : anybody that thinks and disagrees with some british schoolboys and master

most are frustrated and either get locked out or just disappear dealing with this stuff.

Wdl1961 (talk) 23:17, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

score another one for mr. Scheinwerfermann whatever

he consistently generates a big mess and argues any wiki rule out two or three sigmas

a little detective work and elementary logic and thinking makes makes it readily apparent what you are dealing with

but anybody with more than a couple of thousands edits can not have time for that

Wdl1961 (talk) 14:12, 2 August 2009 (UTC) Pilot's Encyclopedia of Aeronautical Knowledge By Federal Aviation Administration //////////////////////////// the refs first have to be red and understood . these two minute editors only look if there is a number there or count the words and no . there are some school boys who do not even do that. also if one has nothing worthwhile to contribute they can feel important deleting. it is interesting to note only the english wiki seems to have these problems . draw your own conclusions if you can .

Wdl1961 (talk) 14:29, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

rotzooi

User:Wdl1961

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

Wdl1961 (talk · contribs) has been edit warring, violating 3RR, by adding how-to instructions in Jump start (vehicle). User has refused meaningful discussion on talk page, and has shown no regard for WP policy, i.e. WP:NOTHOWTO. Edits: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] --Dbratland (talk) 01:51, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Editors should be required to read art. first and apply rules evenly.Wdl1961 (talk) 02:03, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

The guideline you are using, WP:NOTHOWTO, says an article should "should not read like a "how-to" [...] manual". It does not say that an article should not contain any how-to instructions. The article Jump start (vehicle) does not in fact read like a how-to manual. Wdl1961 has merely added a brief section dealing with a fundamental safety issue, that contains some how-to information. But this does not turn the article, as a whole, into a how-to manual. There are other snippets of "how-to" information elsewhere in the same article. For example, the section immediately above the section Wdl1961 added says "A slave cable is plugged in to the receptacle on each vehicle, and the dead vehicle is started with the live vehicle's engine running." If no how-to instructions are to be permitted in Wikipedia, a lot of Wikipedia articles would be hobbled.

Another example is the article on rip current. That has a section on escaping a rip current. This section also contains some how-to instructions. But the article, as a whole, does not read like a how-to manual, and it seem to me that the article would be incomplete, indeed irresponsible, if it did not include this section. --Epipelagic (talk) 02:53, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

after the material has been red by thousands of people we would like to see the working of the keen insight of the remover .Wdl1961 (talk) 04:01, 31 January 2010 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability"

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Difference between revisions) Jump to: navigation, search Revision as of 00:45, 20 October 2009 (edit)Wdl1961 (talk | contribs)m (→Disadvantages: facts)← Previous edit Current revision as of 06:32, 21 October 2009 (edit) (undo)SmackBot (talk | contribs) m (Date maintenance tags and general fixes)

^{[citation needed]}

Internal combustion engine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Difference between revisions) Jump to: navigation, search Revision as of 08:53, 15 December 2008 (edit)58.107.170.17 (talk)(→Classification)← Previous edit Revision as of 12:58, 15 December 2008 (edit) (undo)SmackBot (talk | contribs) m (Date maintenance tags and general fixes)Next edit →

+

Fluid coupling

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Difference between revisions) Jump to: navigation, search Revision as of 19:09, 10 April 2009 (edit)213.249.232.187 (talk)← Previous edit Revision as of 19:10, 10 April 2009 (edit) (undo)213.249.232.187 (talk) (→Calculations)Next edit → Line 35: Line 35:

Electric motor

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Difference between revisions) Jump to: navigation, search Revision as of 06:28, 17 June 2009 (edit)203.63.151.108 (talk)(goatse)← Previous edit Revision as of 06:28, 17 June 2009 (edit) (undo)Zntrip (talk | contribs) m (Reverted edits by 203.63.151.108 to last revision by 99.246.143.181 (HG))Next edit → Line 1: Line 1:

- Goatse.cx +

- From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia +

This user page may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. No cleanup reason has been specified. Please help improve this user page if you can; the talk page may contain suggestions.

Fuel injection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Difference between revisions) Jump to: navigation, search Revision as of 06:32, 15 December 2007 (edit)CZmarlin (talk | contribs)m (→External links: add References section)← Previous edit Revision as of 06:52, 15 December 2007 (edit) (undo)CZmarlin (talk | contribs) m (this article needs footnotes -- not just the tags that were attached to the description of American Motors' attempt to make EFI available on its 1957 Rambler Rebels.)Next edit →

Systems theory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Difference between revisions) Jump to: navigation, search Revision as of 23:36, 31 March 2008 (edit)Mdd (talk | contribs)(→See also: * Systems psychology)← Previous edit Revision as of 20:44, 1 April 2008 (edit) (undo)Mdd (talk | contribs) m (→References)

Steam turbine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Difference between revisions) Jump to: navigation, search

Revision as of 11:14, 4 July 2008 (edit)EdJogg (talk | contribs)m (→History: Hero only DESCRIBED the device, it was created by someone else. Also, 'temple door' reference is irrelevant here.)← Previous edit Revision as of 17:40, 14 July 2008 (edit) (undo)Explodicle (talk | contribs) (

)Next edit →

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Formula One

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Difference between revisions) Jump to: navigation, search Revision as of 21:42, 20 April 2009 (edit)190.28.164.78 (talk)(needed references for: different formulas. Top speed figure with new formula still to be verified. teams base and proportion of european/non-european reference can be just a link to formula1.com)← Previous edit Revision as of 21:56, 20 April 2009 (edit) (undo)190.28.164.78 (talk) Next edit → Line 1: Line 1:

+

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Turbodiesel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Difference between revisions) Jump to: navigation, search Revision as of 16:28, 28 March 2008 (edit)Dale Arnett (talk | contribs)m (→Turbodiesels in the United States)← Previous edit Revision as of 04:17, 4 April 2008 (edit) (undo)Ed! (talk | contribs) m Next edit → Line 1: Line 1:

+

Cruise control

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Difference between revisions) Jump to: navigation, search Revision as of 19:21, 27 April 2008 (edit)Wolfkeeper (talk | contribs)(→History)← Previous edit Revision as of 21:22, 6 May 2008 (edit) (undo)Mdd (talk | contribs) m (→References)Next edit → Line 39: Line 39:

- +

68.41.80.161 no identity userpage talk page but can vandalize others 68.41.80.161 no identity userpage talk page but can vandalize othersWdl1961 (talk) 18:59, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Instead of throwing around accusations you should present links or go to an admin noticeboard. Also, A log in is nice but not required to contribute.Cptnono (talk) 21:18, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

User:Wdl1961/sandbox2 From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia < User:Wdl1961 (Difference between revisions) Jump to: navigation, search Revision as of 16:45, 12 September 2009 (edit)Wdl1961 (talk | contribs)m ← Previous edit Current revision as of 18:43, 12 September 2009 (edit) (undo)68.41.80.161 (talk) (You are showing up in categories again, mate!) Line 399: Line 399:

above copy of my userfileWdl1961 (talk) 21:45, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

It looks like you had the main space pointing at your sandbox (again?) with the categories. #68 probably should have set you a note and delinked. Before getting upset you should heed the warning and not add these categories to you talk page, personal sandbox, or this talk page like you just did. He did it incorrectly (those tags simply were not appropriate) but you certainly needed someone to step in.Cptnono (talk) 21:53, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

except for some incompetent vandalizing what is the problem ?Wdl1961 (talk) 00:25, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Can you word your last comment in a manner that is understandable? Also, there is a difference between vandalizing a page and a stupid edit. Get over it or take it to his talk page.Cptnono (talk) 01:39, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

read left.Wdl1961 (talk) 02:28, 13 September 2009 (UTC) try reading left.Wdl1961 (talk) 02:34, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Floppy disk From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Difference between revisions) Jump to: navigation, search Revision as of 03:04, 7 April 2009 (edit)ClueBot (talk | contribs)m (Reverting possible vandalism by Dvdslvrmn505 to version by SheffieldSteel. False positive? Report it. Thanks, ClueBot. (661835) (Bot))← Previous edit Revision as of 17:59, 8 April 2009 (edit) (undo)81.216.131.26 (talk) (→Zip drive)Next edit → Line 203: Line 203: Zip drive Zip drive====

file

Relational Vibration

4 st "Relational Vibration"--need new term? ==

I've added relational vibration, as it is referred to in my text book, as the effect the speed of pistons can have on the rest of the vehicle. This is referred to in my book as "Relational Vibration", but I've noticed that the copyright is from the mid 90's...does anyone know if there is a new term to refer to this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Williamsburgland (talk • contribs) 23:48, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

This is a pure invention on your part, so cite your references. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:08, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

I think it's completly unprofessional of you to keep accusing me of simply inventing this...citation added —Preceding unsigned comment added by Williamsburgland (talk • contribs) 02:50, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

I've reverted this again, as the ref you added doesn't appear to include it:

Finally, increased piston speed can impact something known as relational vibration, or a vibration felt throughout the vehicle as said vehicles forward speed approaches the speed of the pistons. The higher the piston speed, the greater the effects of relational vibration.

http://books.google.com/books?id=mX1-OJBQ6ngC&pg=PA378&lpg=PA378&dq=piston+speed+fuel+efficiency&source=web&ots=ijrmSC2ryX&sig=akBenKYwvHm3soTVE8bblV_UCPU#PPP1,M1

Could you please point to where (page number?) this ref supports your claim? Andy Dingley (talk) 22:07, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Apologies on the late reply...it appears as though the PDF I cited did not include the entire document...I stand by my material but cannot provide a link, so per Wiki guidelines I agree that the term should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Williamsburgland (talk • contribs) 18:19, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Can you please cite a page, so that I can check the book. I can't see it, nor can I see it in any of my fairly extensive library of similar books. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:09, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

there is coverage of relational vibration between engine and supporting structure on pg 292 http://books.google.com/books?id=mX1-OJBQ6ngC&pg=PA378&lpg=PA378&dq=piston+speed+fuel+efficiency&source=web&ots=ijrmSC2ryX&sig=akBenKYwvHm3soTVE8bblV_UCPU#PPP1,M1
Wdl1961 (talk) 22:17, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I've worked in the field of automotive noise and vibration for 30 years and have never heard this term. It also does NOT appear in the textbook Wdl cites, according to google search. p292 certainly does not discuss it, or indeed anything associating piston speed and vehicle speed (an absurd concept BTW). Greglocock (talk) 12:10, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I've worked in high-precision optics, and I'm somewhat familiar with it! The concept is real enough, but it isn't going to happen in a car engine (for engineering-viable values of piston speed and road speed). It has been a problem in the past with some steam paddleships. As to the book, then it's not in my paper copy anywhere I can find it, nor in the index, nor on my p292. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:44, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

there is coverage of relational vibration between engine and supporting structure on pg 292 http://books.google.com/books?id=mX1-OJBQ6ngC&pg=PA378&lpg=PA378&dq=piston+speed+fuel+efficiency&source=web&ots=ijrmSC2ryX&sig=akBenKYwvHm3soTVE8bblV_UCPU#PPP1,M1
just delete "relational" and read the rest of pages 291-292 -293 dealing with general vibration
Wdl1961 (talk) 16:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

There is coverage of Bigfoot in that ref if I delete the word "vibration" and insert the word "sasquatch"! You can't treat a reference in that way.

"Relational vibration" has a definition. By the nature of that definition, it's not going to affect cars and car engines. Vibration from the engine certainly does, but it's of other forms and not describable under that definition. The effects of coupling through the engine mounts (and expecially notions of "tuning" resonant frequencies around such mounts) will have vastly more influence on vibration into a car chassis than the road speed at which it's travelling. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:32, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

try tuned , coupled ,transmitted , oscillation, noise , critical frequency,vibration,resonance,coupling,
every piece of machinery or computer i worked on/with had one or more of these and did not care about the label.
yuor computer has a relational frequency with the transmitter,eardrums?
also try classification,groups,classes,relations,concepts
Wdl1961 (talk) 21:40, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Nobody is denying that engines vibrate and cause the surrounding structure to vibrate. We're just saying that the phrase 'relational vibration' has no particular meaning or usage in this field. I suppose this means I have to check ALL the references you've given now to see if they really support the statements made, since you don't seem to understand why this is an issue. Thanks a bunch. Greglocock (talk) 22:30, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

all of the above is simply energy transfer of some freqency /frequencies of some magnitude from point a to point b (sometimes? both ways)
each discipline thinks theirs is unique ,nothing unique about it
Wdl1961 (talk) 01:28, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what you are trying to prove. Can you find JUST ONE SOLID reference to the phrase "relational vibration"? If not then we aren't having a discussion, you seem to be trying to justify providing a misleading reference. To help you out, I have 3 Noise and Vibration reference books by my desk, here at home, I also have 3 engine textbooks. Now, guess how many of those have the phrase in the index? None. It doesn't appear in the McGraw Hill dictionary of Physics and maths either. So it is either a very specialised term, or a neologism, or a mistranslation. I favour the latter, relative vibration would be my guess, but of course that has nothing to do with matching piston speeds and vehicle speeds, which is still an absurd concept.Greglocock (talk) 01:51, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Q.E.D.
Wdl1961 (talk) 02:10, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

google Results 1 - 10 of about 91,600 for relational vibration. (0.06 seconds)

Sound Accord - - The Sound Self Part Two When we are fluent in the language of

relational vibration

, we inhabit the territory of the heart with confidence, grace, and ease. ... www.sound-accord.com/-_the_sound_self_part_two - 16k - Cached - Similar pages
Wdl1961 (talk) 03:06, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I have to say you are wrong that this relational vibration term exists. You performed a bad google search. Try searching google with relational vibration in quotes. The number of results drops suddenly to about 120. Then add the word engine to clarify its relation to this topic. It drops to 30, almost all of which, surprisingly, in one way or another reference this talk page. So yes my friend, you are in fact the only person on the entire internet using relational vibration in conjunction with engines. This case seems settled. 128.6.83.117 (talk) 01:54, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

the phenomena excists. all of above about the label .so use the label and ref you like and change it.

then the problem is solved.

Wdl1961 (talk) 14:27, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

What on earth are you on about? Nobody has provided a single decent ref to the idea in relation to engines. Greglocock (talk) 10:20, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

every mechanical engineer knows what it is or he will find out the hard way

//tacoma narrows bridge\\

maybe we need a new wiki article

Wdl1961 (talk) 14:07, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

In relation to the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, you're probably referring to resonance (which it seem, ironically, wasn't actually the cause of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge collapse despite what many believe). Resonance does most certainly occur in engined, but has never been described using the term "relational frequency" anywhere ever.

To be honest, I must say "relational frequency" sounds like a term that describes the phenomenon of resonance quite well (a phenomenon caused by two the relationship between frequencies), but Wikipedia is not the place for coining new phrases. _ɹəə pıɔnı 15:47, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure why we need a new phrase anyway. The OP was originally suggesting it was to due to the matching of piston speed and vehicle speed, which is laughable. OT Yes, it's funny the way that everybody who sees the Tacoma film in high school is taught that it was a resonance. Greglocock (talk) 23:19, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

what is the term and refs we should use ??

i (mistakelingly) thought that was the original issue

Wdl1961 (talk) 00:03, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

there is a vibration article and Torsional vibration article in wiki

Wdl1961 (talk) 01:51, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Wingtip vortices

decreases Max turbulence anywhere on the wing ==

Increase in flaps results in increase in wing surface and decrease in load /surface ratio lbs/sqft. This decreases the Max Pressure gradient on any edge and therefore decreases Max turbulence anywhere on the wing .Wdl1961 (talk) 01:01, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

hhhh

droop speed control Steam turbine 6₁₃ × 9₁₃ = 42₁₃ (using base 13). .^[1] ^[1] ^[1]

>>

599⁄600

WP:FIVE F.R. Eckmar centenary game at Lord's.^[2]

Although a regular was not until 1983 gallery.^[2]

http://www.debinnenvaart.nl/binnenvaarttaal/afbeeldingen/onderdelen/motoren/kromhout-plakboek2.html

Lord's.<
Diesel engines have the highest rate of power from fuel compared to any internal or external combustion engine. ^[3]

^[4] ^[4]
The MAN S80ME-C7 low speed diesel engines use 155 gram fuel per kWh , which is the highest conversion of fuel into power by any internal or external combustion engine. ^[3]

hh22

The essence of editing is easy come easy go. Unless you can really say to yourself, "What the hell. There's plenty more where that came from, let's throw it away." you can't really edit. You have to be a big spender?
Editing must be cut-throat. You must wade in with teeth gritted. Cut away flesh and leave only bone. Learn to say things with a relationship instead of words. If you have to make introductions or transitions, you have things in the wrong order. If they were in the right order they wouldn't need introductions or transitions. Force yourself to leave out all subsidiaries and then, by brute force, you will have to rearrange the essentials into their proper order.
Every word omitted keeps another reader with you. Every word retained saps strength from the others. Think of throwing away not as negative-not as crumpling up sheets of paper in helplessness in rage-but as a positive, creative, generative act. Learn to play the role of the sculptor pulling off layers of stone with his chisel to reveal a figure beneath. Leaving things out makes the backbone or structure show better.
Editing means being tough enough to make sure someone will actually read it.

Peter Elbow, Writing Without Teachers, Oxford University Press, 1973; as quoted in American Journal of Physics 44(8), p740, August 1976

,

^[5] <^[6] ref name=tubr/>

^[7]

^[8]

commercial use, except in very remote areas of the developing world. An exception to this is marine use; hot-bulb engines were widely fitted to inland barges and narrowboats in Europe. The United Kingdom's first two self-powered "motor" narrowboats^{[citation needed]}—Cadbury's Bournville I and Bournville II in 1911^[9]—were powered by Bolinder single-cylinder hot-bulb engines, and this type became common between the 1920s and the 1950s. With hot-bulb engines being generally long-lived and ideally suited to such a use, it is not uncommon to find vessels still fitted with their original hot-bulb engines today.

``````````````````````````````

^ ^a ^b ^c BBBBBBB
^ ^a ^b Buckman, David. Dictionary of Artists in Britain since 1945, p.174. Art Dictionaries, Bristol, 2006
^ ^a ^b www.osagcd.com/FeaturedEngine.html
^ ^a ^b http://www.debinnenvaart.nl/binnenvaarttaal/afbeeldingen/onderdelen/motoren/kromhout-plakboek2.html
^ http://www.daytronic.com/products/trans/t-magpickup.htm
^ http://://www.experiencefestival.com/turbocharger_-_history The directly-driven compressor in a supercharger does not suffer this problem.
^ http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:zFsbZWV246QJ:journals2.iranscience.net:800/www.memagazine.org/www.memagazine.org/backissues/august97/features/diesel/diesel.html+prechamber+losses&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=11&gl=ca As combustion proceeds from the swirl or prechamber, you get throttle losses and heat losses, which are the major reasons for the lower efficiency compared to DI,"
^ http://www3.abe.iastate.edu/human_house/aen206.asp Diesel (compression ignition) engines run with an excess of air and often produce less than 1200 ppm CO.
^ "Cadbury's of Bournville fleet". A.M.Models. Retrieved 2008-11-26. {| ! name !! ... !! build date !! |- | BOURNVILLE l [sic] || ... || 06/[19]11 |- | BOURNVILLE II || ... || 11/[19]11 |} {{cite web}}: line feed character in |quote= at position 3 (help)

obviously wrong; <mat h>r\,N^2D^5</math>, see fluid coupling also

"As with a basic fluid coupling the theoretical torque capacity of a converter is proportional to $r\,N^{2}D^{5}$ , where $r$ is sity of the fluid, $N$ is the impeller speed (rpm), and $D$ is the diameter."

obviously wrong $r\,N^{2}D^{5}$ , $r\,N^{5}D^{2}$ is correct see fluid coupling also .try basic eng handbooks.Wdl1961 (talk) 00:21, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

No. Not "obviously wrong" and the WP:RS handbook ref I've just added agreed with ω^2 D^5, as it read before, and as I understand it to be. If you can show that it's "obviously wrong", then please do so. If you have a reliable ref that supports your claim, then please do so. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:40, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I've just checked (and fixed) Fluid coupling to N^2D^5. That only claimed N^5D^2 (incorrectly) because you changed it last January. Please stop introducing errors into Wikipedia like this. You have a track record for this sort of error, incorrect and unsupported by references. Please stop. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:46, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

see Revision as of 06:36, 24 December 2006 (edit) (undo)Bigdumbdinosaur .also p=kv^2.//pump.turbine.flow = kv^2.kv^2.v=kv^5.Wdl1961 (talk) 01:21, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

No matter what the article may or may not have claimed, you can't use it as a WP:RS for itself! Cite a _real_ reference. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:32, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

global

‪===Benzine===

////////////////

Hello, Wdl1961. You have new messages at [[User talk:Engine control unit|User talk:Engine control unit]].
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

///////////////////

Hello, Wdl1961. You have new messages at Engine control unit's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

bbbb

http://www.firstdiesel.com/ .>6cil ds pmp <! see ref --scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/OttoCycle.html-->

<!-ZZbZZZ->

http://www.iet.aau.dk/sec2/junkers.htm

http://www.dieterwunderlich.de/Rudolf_Diesel.htm

the \\\\\

PPPPPPP The {{weasel}} tag can be added to the top of an article or section to draw attention to the presence of weasel words. For less drastic cases, the {{weasel word}} tag (^{[weasel words]}), the {{Who?}} tag (^[who?]) or the {{Which?}} tag (^[which?]) (all of which include an internal wikilink to this page) can be added directly to the phrase in question; same as the {{fact}} tag (^{[citation needed]}).

<-- got refs?--->

Hello, Wdl1961. You have new messages at Wdl1961's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Wdl1961. You have new messages at Diesel's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

aaa

$x'\approx x$ , \approx x</math>,
power
power
power
scooters
/////////////

physics

Wdl1961

Hi again, LHvU. Thanks much for your assistance with Vegavairbob. I'm having trouble effectively engaging with a user — Wdl1961 — with a long track record of disruptive edits accompanied by incoherent discussion (or none at all) on the relevant talk pages (see his user and talk pages, as well as the bizarre, incoherent edits he's made to my talk page [8], [9], [10], [11], [12]. His present fixation is removal of valid maintenance templates from articles without correcting the problems the templates indicate, despite being asked, told, and warned to stop. Present targets of this behaviour include Bumper (automobile) and Engine control unit. I've filed for another WP:3O, reported his continued vandalism following final (level-4) warning at AIV, and co-certified an RFC/U (with plenty of diffs). Can you please assist and/or suggest what else I might try? Thanks. —Scheinwerfermann ^T·_C20:20, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I have already blocked for 48 hours per your AIV report - I noted the similarities to Vegavairbob in not following consensus in my block message; do you think they might be the same editor attempting to harass you? It is a bit depressing to think someone may wish to irritate a stranger because of a dispute over an article, but it does happen. LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:23, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I can all but guarantee Wdl1961 won't change his behaviour one iota once the block expires. I'm not sure I think he's a VVB sock; his meatpuppetlike aping of VVB's edits appears to be opportunistically aimed at what he thinks will perturb me right now; I've been cleaning up after his strange, incoherent babbling and odd fixations for quite awhile. See Talk:Poppet valve, for example. I think there's something the matter with the guy; his behaviour is overall really strange. Take a look at how he carefully copies bits and scraps from talk pages (and [ sections of my contributions]...weird kind of stalking, eh?). Look at this, the least-incoherent comment I think I've ever seen him post. It's still pretty detached from reality, and appears to contain natural and artificial MPOV flavouring. This is more typical, and less coherent (but no less tendentious). Here is one of his more overt attempt to sic admins on me (for…um…for…uh…???). What's the best approach to someone like this, d'you figure? —Scheinwerfermann ^T·_C22:11, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

As Wikipedia is the "...encyclopedia anyone can edit" I think the best response would be to ignore everything accept obvious violations of the policies and then report them as you would any vandal/ill intended editor. Not raising to the bait is the best long term solution to anyone trying to get a reaction - although in the short term they may try harder. I would also suggest changing your mindset, so you simply consider the other party as a well meaning but wrong editor rather than an adversary. This may help you deal with the irritation factor better. LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:28, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

This is much in accord with my present approach. I don't see Wdl1961 as an adversary, though he seems to see me as such. As they say, it takes two to tango, and I'm not dancin'. I'll just carry on treating his disruptions, when they occur, the same as anyone else's. —Scheinwerfermann ^T·_C14:28, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

cccc

power

^[1]

http://www.manbw.com/engines/TwoStrokeLowSpeedPropMEEngines.asp?model=S80ME-C7

The MAN S80ME-C7 low speed diesel engines use 155 gram fuel per kWh , which is the highest conversion of fuel into power by any internal or external combustion engine. ^[2] ^[2]

^[3] ^[3]

167 167 155 g/kWh 167 155 167 155

Torque is the product of the magnitude of the force and the perpendicular distance from the force to the axis of rotation (i.e. the pivot point). ^[4] ^[5]

^[6]

``````````````````````````````

^ ^a ^b "Dual-fuel-electric LNG carriers" (PDF).
^ ^a ^b http://www.www.manbw.com/engines/TwoStrokeLowSpeedPropMEEngines.asp?model=S80ME-C7 .html
^ ^a ^b http://www.debinnenvaart.nl/binnenvaarttaal/afbeeldingen/onderdelen/motoren/kromhout-plakboek2.html
^ http://www.physics.uoguelph.ca/tutorials/torque/Q.torque.intro.html
^ http://www.thedieselpage.com/mileage.htm When used under identical operating conditions, a diesel engine will likely produce at least twice the engine life of a gas engine.
^ http://www.ornl.gov/sci/btc/apps/Restructuring/ORNLTM200341.pdf -pg.7

ctctct

= ≠ ≈<

^{[citation needed]}
^{[citation needed]}

^{[citation needed]}
Tegenwoordig wordt aan het einde van een bewijs in plaats van q.e.d. ook vaak het symbool ■ of het symbool □ gebruikt; deze symbolen zijn voorgesteld door de wiskundige Paul Halmos. ///////////////

:Strongly cking|Leatherstocking]] (talk) 20:08, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

sssss

he United Kingdom's first two self-powered "motor" narrowboats^{[citation needed]}—Cadbury's Bournville I and Bournville II in 1911^[1]

^ "Cadbury's of Bournville fleet". A.M.Models. Retrieved 2008-11-26. {| ! name !! ... !! build date !! |- | BOURNVILLE l [sic] || ... || 06/[19]11 |- | BOURNVILLE II || ... || 11/[19]11 |} {{cite web}}: line feed character in |quote= at position 3 (help)

ttttt

www.invention-protection.com/pdf_patents/pat608845.pdf - Similar

METHOD OF IGNITING AND REGULATING COMBUSTION FOR INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES RUDOLF DIESELwww.invention-protection.com/pdf_patents/pat608845.pdf - Similar

<^[1] ref name=tubr/>

<http://://www.invention-protection.com/pdf_patents/pat608845.pdf - </ref>

Steam turbine efficiencies have yet to break 50% yet diesel engines routinely break 50% especially in marine applications.

^[2] ^[3] ^[4] ^[5] /////////////////