<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How Many Horsepower In A Twinkie?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rough-equivalents.com/2008/04/how-many-horsepower-in-a-twinkie/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rough-equivalents.com/2008/04/how-many-horsepower-in-a-twinkie/</link>
	<description>Making Numbers Fun</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 03 Jan 2010 23:29:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: FAA Certificated Aircraft Technician/Mechanic (A&#38;P)</title>
		<link>http://www.rough-equivalents.com/2008/04/how-many-horsepower-in-a-twinkie/comment-page-1/#comment-192</link>
		<dc:creator>FAA Certificated Aircraft Technician/Mechanic (A&#38;P)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 00:20:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rough-equivalents.com/?p=26#comment-192</guid>
		<description>Technically our &quot;A&amp;P Licenses&quot; are really &#039;A&amp;P Certificates&#039;.  

The legal dictionary definitions of &#039;License&#039; vs. &#039;Certificate&#039; is that a License refers to &#039;acting&#039; within a business where as a Certificate refers to a privilege to practice due to being technically-skilled in a particular field or fields.

The practicing privileges are far greater legally being &#039;certificated&#039; vs. being &quot;licensed&quot;. Since a license as per the law dictionary definition refers to business owner&#039;s right to act, not the privilege to practice.  I.E., &#039;Liquor License&#039; for a business owner to sell liquor vs. &#039;Certified Liquor Manufacturer&#039;, certified or certificated in the applied science skills to manufacture liquor into a final product for sale.

We are Aircraft and Piston/Jet Propulsion Engine Certificated Aircraft Technicians/Mechanics or &#039;A&amp;Ps&#039; are skilled in the Applied Science Technical Skills to maintain, repair, modify, invent, manufacture, construct and diagnose any type of Aircraft and any Piston/Jet Propulsion Powerplant/Engine and any other applicable technology or technologies.

We as in all A&amp;Ps’ who apply their technical skills into more than just Line Maintenance for crooked Corporations.  :)

Just hit the books and use your A&amp;P in all manners possible. Take on all technical applications between Automotive and Aviation/Aerospace and also publishing your own technical publications.  Maintain and develop your Applied Physics skills, this is the backbone of having intimate understanding of all the technologies out there.

The rest of the world outside of the U.S. classifies us as &#039;Aircraft Engineers&#039; or at the very minimum &#039;Aircraft Maintenance Engineers&#039;. 

The U.S. is nothing more than a Corporation. Everything within the U.S. Corporation&#039;s civil, criminal, probate and commerce reflects the U.S. Corporate Laws and their adjunct corporate titles.  

Get a Law Dictionary or look up one online which represents the U.S. Corporation. You will be greatly enlightened about why everything is labeled as it is within the U.S. and why all the &quot;stupid&quot; decisions of this &quot;Government&quot; are actually carefully-planned initiatives.  

The U.S. Corporation is privately-owned by the British Monarchy and the Vatican ever since the American Stock Market collapsed in 1929.

Most so-called U.S. &quot;Engineers&quot; can&#039;t even calculate the Horsepower and Heat Energy Potential of a Twinkie! What&#039;s the world coming to!?  lol

I think they&#039;re too busy promoting materials for the ASTM, making millions and billions of dollars for Super Corporations and doing whatever Scientists and R&amp;D Planners tell them to do, to get too technical.


ASTM - American Society for Testing and Materials.


Take care Achelea.  :)

Take care to the owner of this Blog.  :)

No offense to any Engineers here, I understand that it&#039;s all business, nothing personal.  :)


- FAA Certificated Aircraft Technician/Mechanic (A&amp;P) -</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Technically our "A&amp;P Licenses" are really 'A&amp;P Certificates'.  </p>
<p>The legal dictionary definitions of 'License' vs. 'Certificate' is that a License refers to 'acting' within a business where as a Certificate refers to a privilege to practice due to being technically-skilled in a particular field or fields.</p>
<p>The practicing privileges are far greater legally being 'certificated' vs. being "licensed". Since a license as per the law dictionary definition refers to business owner's right to act, not the privilege to practice.  I.E., 'Liquor License' for a business owner to sell liquor vs. 'Certified Liquor Manufacturer', certified or certificated in the applied science skills to manufacture liquor into a final product for sale.</p>
<p>We are Aircraft and Piston/Jet Propulsion Engine Certificated Aircraft Technicians/Mechanics or 'A&amp;Ps' are skilled in the Applied Science Technical Skills to maintain, repair, modify, invent, manufacture, construct and diagnose any type of Aircraft and any Piston/Jet Propulsion Powerplant/Engine and any other applicable technology or technologies.</p>
<p>We as in all A&amp;Ps’ who apply their technical skills into more than just Line Maintenance for crooked Corporations.  <img src='http://www.rough-equivalents.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Just hit the books and use your A&amp;P in all manners possible. Take on all technical applications between Automotive and Aviation/Aerospace and also publishing your own technical publications.  Maintain and develop your Applied Physics skills, this is the backbone of having intimate understanding of all the technologies out there.</p>
<p>The rest of the world outside of the U.S. classifies us as 'Aircraft Engineers' or at the very minimum 'Aircraft Maintenance Engineers'. </p>
<p>The U.S. is nothing more than a Corporation. Everything within the U.S. Corporation's civil, criminal, probate and commerce reflects the U.S. Corporate Laws and their adjunct corporate titles.  </p>
<p>Get a Law Dictionary or look up one online which represents the U.S. Corporation. You will be greatly enlightened about why everything is labeled as it is within the U.S. and why all the "stupid" decisions of this "Government" are actually carefully-planned initiatives.  </p>
<p>The U.S. Corporation is privately-owned by the British Monarchy and the Vatican ever since the American Stock Market collapsed in 1929.</p>
<p>Most so-called U.S. "Engineers" can't even calculate the Horsepower and Heat Energy Potential of a Twinkie! What's the world coming to!?  lol</p>
<p>I think they're too busy promoting materials for the ASTM, making millions and billions of dollars for Super Corporations and doing whatever Scientists and R&amp;D Planners tell them to do, to get too technical.</p>
<p>ASTM - American Society for Testing and Materials.</p>
<p>Take care Achelea.  <img src='http://www.rough-equivalents.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Take care to the owner of this Blog.  <img src='http://www.rough-equivalents.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>No offense to any Engineers here, I understand that it's all business, nothing personal.  <img src='http://www.rough-equivalents.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>- FAA Certificated Aircraft Technician/Mechanic (A&amp;P) -</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FAA Licensed Aircraft Technician/Mechanic (A&#38;P)</title>
		<link>http://www.rough-equivalents.com/2008/04/how-many-horsepower-in-a-twinkie/comment-page-1/#comment-191</link>
		<dc:creator>FAA Licensed Aircraft Technician/Mechanic (A&#38;P)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2009 00:59:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rough-equivalents.com/?p=26#comment-191</guid>
		<description>Hello.  Thank you Achelea.  :)

Us Aviation Technicians/Mechanics (A&amp;Ps&#039;) are very highly-skilled people who are the nuts and bolts of all technologies applicable to both Aerospace/Aviation &amp; Automotive Technologies:  A&amp;P/ASE Applied Sciences.  Including other applicable mechanical and electronics technologies.

We have the Applied Science skills that so-called &quot;Engineers&quot; lack.  They&#039;re not real Engineers, they&#039;re Corporate frauds and ASTM Sales Reps who &quot;engineer&quot; problems.  That&#039;s why they&#039;re up there in this Corporation run by criminals and frauds called the &quot;USA&quot;. If it weren&#039;t for the masses of people in the USA who happened to agree with all this Corporate fiction, none of these problems and fraud would exist. Then the people who are currently running every department in the USA as of now, would be where they belong:  In prison or on death row.

A&amp;P Aircraft Technician/Mechanic - The one who solves all the problems that Aerospace &quot;Engineers&quot; are responsible for due to their incompetence.

Just continue to hit the books even after getting your A&amp;P License/&quot;Certificate&quot;.  Keep both your Applied Physics and hands-on skills strong for maximizing your Technical Applied Sciences abilities.

Here is another demonstration of how to calculate the theoretical Horsepower of a 300 calorie Twinkie in a more theoretically-accurate sense:


Fuel Source:  Twinkie.

Caloric Potential:  300 Calories.

1 BTU = 0.252 Food Calories.

[(300 Calories) x (0.252 Cal/BTU) = 1,190.48 BTU.

2,545 BTU = 1 Horsepower.

[(1,190.48 BTU) / (2,545 BTU/HP)] = 0.46 HP.

0.46 HP = [(0.46) x (550 Ft-Lbs/Sec) = 253 Ft-Lbs/Sec.

1 BTU/Min = 12.96 Ft-Lbs/Sec.

[(253 Ft-Lbs/Sec) / (12.96 Ft-Lbs/Sec)] = 19.52 BTU/Min.

1 Watt = 1 Joule/Sec

1 Calorie = 4.184 Joules.

1 Joule = 1 Newton x 1 Meter.

1 Newton = 4.45 Lbs.

1 Meter = 3.28 feet.

1 HP = 746 Watts.

[(0.46 HP) x (746 Watts)] = 343.16 Watts.

343.16 Watts = 343.16 Joules/Sec. 

[(300 Calories) x (4.184 Joules)] = 1,255.2 Joules.


Conclusion:  A 300 Calorie Twinkie in more theoretically-accurate terms contains approximately a Power or Heat Energy POTENTIAL of:  0.46 HP;  19.52 BTU/Min; 343.16 Watts; 343.16 Joules/Sec; 1,255.2 Joules.

These calculations are potential not kinetic calculations.  There is truly no Horsepower until movement or speed is involved.  Whether that speed be linear speed or rotational speed (RPM).


A 300 CALORIE TWINKIE HAS A POWER AND/OR HEAT ENERGY POTENTIAL OF:


0.46 HP.

19.52 BTU/Min.

343.16 Watts.

343.16 Joules/Sec.

1,255.2 Joules.


--------------------------------------------------END---------------------------------------------------</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello.  Thank you Achelea.  <img src='http://www.rough-equivalents.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Us Aviation Technicians/Mechanics (A&amp;Ps') are very highly-skilled people who are the nuts and bolts of all technologies applicable to both Aerospace/Aviation &amp; Automotive Technologies:  A&amp;P/ASE Applied Sciences.  Including other applicable mechanical and electronics technologies.</p>
<p>We have the Applied Science skills that so-called "Engineers" lack.  They're not real Engineers, they're Corporate frauds and ASTM Sales Reps who "engineer" problems.  That's why they're up there in this Corporation run by criminals and frauds called the "USA". If it weren't for the masses of people in the USA who happened to agree with all this Corporate fiction, none of these problems and fraud would exist. Then the people who are currently running every department in the USA as of now, would be where they belong:  In prison or on death row.</p>
<p>A&amp;P Aircraft Technician/Mechanic - The one who solves all the problems that Aerospace "Engineers" are responsible for due to their incompetence.</p>
<p>Just continue to hit the books even after getting your A&amp;P License/"Certificate".  Keep both your Applied Physics and hands-on skills strong for maximizing your Technical Applied Sciences abilities.</p>
<p>Here is another demonstration of how to calculate the theoretical Horsepower of a 300 calorie Twinkie in a more theoretically-accurate sense:</p>
<p>Fuel Source:  Twinkie.</p>
<p>Caloric Potential:  300 Calories.</p>
<p>1 BTU = 0.252 Food Calories.</p>
<p>[(300 Calories) x (0.252 Cal/BTU) = 1,190.48 BTU.</p>
<p>2,545 BTU = 1 Horsepower.</p>
<p>[(1,190.48 BTU) / (2,545 BTU/HP)] = 0.46 HP.</p>
<p>0.46 HP = [(0.46) x (550 Ft-Lbs/Sec) = 253 Ft-Lbs/Sec.</p>
<p>1 BTU/Min = 12.96 Ft-Lbs/Sec.</p>
<p>[(253 Ft-Lbs/Sec) / (12.96 Ft-Lbs/Sec)] = 19.52 BTU/Min.</p>
<p>1 Watt = 1 Joule/Sec</p>
<p>1 Calorie = 4.184 Joules.</p>
<p>1 Joule = 1 Newton x 1 Meter.</p>
<p>1 Newton = 4.45 Lbs.</p>
<p>1 Meter = 3.28 feet.</p>
<p>1 HP = 746 Watts.</p>
<p>[(0.46 HP) x (746 Watts)] = 343.16 Watts.</p>
<p>343.16 Watts = 343.16 Joules/Sec. </p>
<p>[(300 Calories) x (4.184 Joules)] = 1,255.2 Joules.</p>
<p>Conclusion:  A 300 Calorie Twinkie in more theoretically-accurate terms contains approximately a Power or Heat Energy POTENTIAL of:  0.46 HP;  19.52 BTU/Min; 343.16 Watts; 343.16 Joules/Sec; 1,255.2 Joules.</p>
<p>These calculations are potential not kinetic calculations.  There is truly no Horsepower until movement or speed is involved.  Whether that speed be linear speed or rotational speed (RPM).</p>
<p>A 300 CALORIE TWINKIE HAS A POWER AND/OR HEAT ENERGY POTENTIAL OF:</p>
<p>0.46 HP.</p>
<p>19.52 BTU/Min.</p>
<p>343.16 Watts.</p>
<p>343.16 Joules/Sec.</p>
<p>1,255.2 Joules.</p>
<p>--------------------------------------------------END---------------------------------------------------</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Achelea; A&#38;P Certified</title>
		<link>http://www.rough-equivalents.com/2008/04/how-many-horsepower-in-a-twinkie/comment-page-1/#comment-188</link>
		<dc:creator>Achelea; A&#38;P Certified</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Jan 2009 20:01:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rough-equivalents.com/?p=26#comment-188</guid>
		<description>To the FAA Licensed Aircraft Technician:

I love you man. XD</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To the FAA Licensed Aircraft Technician:</p>
<p>I love you man. XD</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FAA Licensed Aircraft Technician</title>
		<link>http://www.rough-equivalents.com/2008/04/how-many-horsepower-in-a-twinkie/comment-page-1/#comment-145</link>
		<dc:creator>FAA Licensed Aircraft Technician</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 12:59:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rough-equivalents.com/?p=26#comment-145</guid>
		<description>First off, certain definitions need to be established in accuracy before this question can be answered correctly:

1 Horsepower = 550 foot-lbs. of work per 1 second.

1 Calorie = The amount of heat required to raise one gram of water 1 degree Celcius or
1.8 degrees Fahrenheit.

1 Calorie = 4.184 Joules.

1 Joule = 1 newton times 1 meter, expressed in
newton-meters.

1 Newton = kilograms x 9.8 meters/sec squared.

Newton-Meters = Metric measurement for Work.

Foot-Lbs. = Standard measurement for Work.

Power = Force x Distance/Time; measured in Watts or Joules, depending on either Standard
or Metric applications.

BTU (British Thermal Unit) - The amount of 
heat required to raise 1 lbs. of water by 1 degree Fahrenheit based on water&#039;s maximum density limit reached at 39.1 degrees F; Also a BTU can be used to define the difference in 
temperature in water between 59 degree F and
60 degrees F; For approximation sakes, BTU is
defined as the amount of heat required to raise
one lbs. water 1 degree F.

1 BTU = 251.90 calories.

1 BTU = 1055 joules.

1 BTU = 778.26 foot-lbs.

Knowing this, in order to take the caloric potential energy found in a Twinkie at a stamped calorie count of let&#039;s say &quot;300 calories&quot;, this means we have the following:


300 calories x 4.184 Joules = 1255.20 Joules.

1255.20 Joules / 1055 Joules = 1.19 BTU

1.19 BTU x 778.26 foot-lbs = 926.13 foot-lbs.

926.13 foot-lbs / 550 foot-lbs = 1.68 

No units yet, because it is a coefficient
without any theoretical time limits presented.

However if placed over the span of one second
the theoretical HP would be 1.68 HP. This is
not practical, since the total energy release
of the twinky is unknown, and is specific to
each person&#039;s metabolic rate.

What is known, is that if in a controlled 
environment and only that twinkie is being
assessed, and all energy is expended from that
twinkie of &quot;300 calories&quot;, there would be an
approximate mechanical horsepower rating in
work performed per second of 1.68 HP, for that
given Twinkie.


The human body as you know is an internal
combustion heat engine as well. But based off 
exothermic heat energy release through 
chemical reactions.


But if you get into four and two stroke gasoline-powered piston engines, the formula
PLANK/33,000 foot-lbs per second can be used
to calculate the theoretical Horsepower Rating
of that given engine, based on specifications.
Indicated Horsepower (IHP) is all theoretical and does not factor in the Friction Horsepower
losses of the moving parts of the engine,
the load on the flywheel and the loads of the 
application being driven by the engine. To 
calculate the true Horsepower, IHP later has to
be derived to come up with Brake Horsepower
leading also to torque rating at a given RPM.

But for reference sakes,  PLANK/33,000 foot-lbs./minute will allow you to calculate the Indicated Horsepower on a piston engine, which  is defined as:


P = Mean Effective Internal Cylinder Pressure

L = Piston Stroke Length in feet.

A = Piston Surface Area (kept in square inches)

N = Number of Powerstrokes per minute; (on 
    four-stroke piston engine this would be
    1/2 the RPM)

K = Number of cylinders.

33,000 foot-lbs/minute = 550 foot-lbs/sec times
60 seconds = Horsepower constant over 1 minute
since RPM is being used.


For calculating Theoretical Horsepower of a 
given piston engine, also known as Indicated
Horsepower (IHP), an example will be given
below:


If you have a four-cycle, gasoline-driven,
eight cylinder, V8 automotive piston engine
with a Mean Effective Internal Cylinder Pressure of 195 PSI, bore/stroke of 3.25&quot;/3.00&quot; running at 2500 RPM, calculate the
IHP.


P = 195 PSI

L = 3/12 foot = 1/4 foot = 0.25 feet

A = Pi x (r)squared = 3.14159 x (1.625 x 1.625)  = 8.30 sqaure inches

N = 2500 RPM/2 = 1250 powerstrokes/minute

K = 8 cylinders


(195 x 0.25 x 8.30 x 1250 x 8)/33,000 = 
122.61 IHP


        122.61   INDICATED HORSEPOWER


Now if you wanted to get the Brake Horsepower
out of this application, first you would either
have to find out the work (rotational distance time force applied) per 1 revolution of the flywheel divided into (2 x 3.14159) this would get your the torque. Then from there multiply it back to (2 x 3.14159) times the RPM. Whatever that differs from the Indicated Horsepower Calculation, is the Friction Horsepower losses. IHP - Friction HP = BHP.


This also points to the fact that you need motion or speed involved when figuring out Horsepower.  This relates to the Twinkie &quot;Horsepower&quot; question. It would have to be applied to whatever application of 1.68 HP would be. Or 550 foot-lbs/second x 1.68 in terms of time, distance and force exerted within the person who ate that Twinky. So at best the 1.68 HP is just a rough base power rating for the Twinky. How it is expended over time, distance and force exerted is completely abstract. 


One last fact regarding Horsepower, is the fact that NO HORSEPOWER exists without a speed or motion of the application being factored into the equation.

A good example of this aside from the previous ones, is turbine jet engines.  It is simple to calculate the theoretical Horsepower rating of given Jet Propulsion Engines. But NO HORSEPOWER exists in any Jet Engine, even at peak thrust output UNLESS the aircraft is in MOTION!!  So a Static Thrust rating (thrust while aircraft is held at rest) regardless to the amount of thrust is ALWAYS ZERO HORSEPOWER.
Only when the aircraft rolls into motion, does the Static Thrust now change into Net Thrust.
Net Thrust is when the given thrust rating is applied AND the aircraft IS in MOTION! Then Horsepower output is developing.

An example of this, is with the following question:


The Boeing 747-200 airliner has a max net thrust rating of 230,000 lbs. Calculate the mechanical horsepower equivalent of the thrust rating output of the four engines on the B747-200, when it is traveling at 500 MHP.


1 Horsepower = 1 lbs. of thrust AT 375 MHP.

375 MHP = 550 feet per second. 

This means that 230,000 lbs. of thrust will have a mechanical horsepower equivalent when traveling at 500 MHP of:


500/375 = 1.33

1.33 x 230,000 = 306,666.67


306,666.67 HP IS THE MECHANICAL EQUIVALENT HORSEPOWER RATING OF THE B747-200 WITH 230,000 LBS. OF THRUST MOVING AT 500 MHP.


THERE NEEDS TO BE SPEED OR MOTION INVOLVED IN ANYTHING FOR WHICH A HORSEPOWER RATING IS TO BE CALCULATED. IN PISTON ENGINES IT INVOLVES RPM. IN JET ENGINES IT INVOLVES FORWARD SPEED. WITH THE TWINKY IT MAY APPLIED TO THE AMOUNT OF FORCE THE PERSON EXERTS A CERTAIN DISTANCE. THE CALORIC HEAT RELEASE OF A 300 CALORIE TWINKY WILL ALLOW THE PERSON TO ACCOMPLISH AN &quot;X&quot; AMOUNT OF FORCE APPLIED TO A &quot;X&quot; AMOUNT OF DISTANCE OVER AN &quot;X&quot; AMOUNT OF TIME.

IN ALL TECHNICAL CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS TRAINING FOR ANY OF THESE TECHNOLOGY FIELDS, THERE&#039;S ALWAYS A QUESTION WHERE A RUNNER EATS A HAMBURGER WITH A CERTAIN CALORIE COUNT, AND THE STUDENT IS TOLD TO CALCULATE THE THEORETICAL DISTANCE THIS RUNNER COULD ATTAIN, BASED ON HIS/HER WEIGHT (FORCE) AND THE DISTANCE HE/SHE ACCOMPLISHES OVER TIME, TO THAT CONSUMED HAMBURGER. THAT IS THE SAME THING WITH THIS TWINKY.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First off, certain definitions need to be established in accuracy before this question can be answered correctly:</p>
<p>1 Horsepower = 550 foot-lbs. of work per 1 second.</p>
<p>1 Calorie = The amount of heat required to raise one gram of water 1 degree Celcius or<br />
1.8 degrees Fahrenheit.</p>
<p>1 Calorie = 4.184 Joules.</p>
<p>1 Joule = 1 newton times 1 meter, expressed in<br />
newton-meters.</p>
<p>1 Newton = kilograms x 9.8 meters/sec squared.</p>
<p>Newton-Meters = Metric measurement for Work.</p>
<p>Foot-Lbs. = Standard measurement for Work.</p>
<p>Power = Force x Distance/Time; measured in Watts or Joules, depending on either Standard<br />
or Metric applications.</p>
<p>BTU (British Thermal Unit) - The amount of<br />
heat required to raise 1 lbs. of water by 1 degree Fahrenheit based on water's maximum density limit reached at 39.1 degrees F; Also a BTU can be used to define the difference in<br />
temperature in water between 59 degree F and<br />
60 degrees F; For approximation sakes, BTU is<br />
defined as the amount of heat required to raise<br />
one lbs. water 1 degree F.</p>
<p>1 BTU = 251.90 calories.</p>
<p>1 BTU = 1055 joules.</p>
<p>1 BTU = 778.26 foot-lbs.</p>
<p>Knowing this, in order to take the caloric potential energy found in a Twinkie at a stamped calorie count of let's say "300 calories", this means we have the following:</p>
<p>300 calories x 4.184 Joules = 1255.20 Joules.</p>
<p>1255.20 Joules / 1055 Joules = 1.19 BTU</p>
<p>1.19 BTU x 778.26 foot-lbs = 926.13 foot-lbs.</p>
<p>926.13 foot-lbs / 550 foot-lbs = 1.68 </p>
<p>No units yet, because it is a coefficient<br />
without any theoretical time limits presented.</p>
<p>However if placed over the span of one second<br />
the theoretical HP would be 1.68 HP. This is<br />
not practical, since the total energy release<br />
of the twinky is unknown, and is specific to<br />
each person's metabolic rate.</p>
<p>What is known, is that if in a controlled<br />
environment and only that twinkie is being<br />
assessed, and all energy is expended from that<br />
twinkie of "300 calories", there would be an<br />
approximate mechanical horsepower rating in<br />
work performed per second of 1.68 HP, for that<br />
given Twinkie.</p>
<p>The human body as you know is an internal<br />
combustion heat engine as well. But based off<br />
exothermic heat energy release through<br />
chemical reactions.</p>
<p>But if you get into four and two stroke gasoline-powered piston engines, the formula<br />
PLANK/33,000 foot-lbs per second can be used<br />
to calculate the theoretical Horsepower Rating<br />
of that given engine, based on specifications.<br />
Indicated Horsepower (IHP) is all theoretical and does not factor in the Friction Horsepower<br />
losses of the moving parts of the engine,<br />
the load on the flywheel and the loads of the<br />
application being driven by the engine. To<br />
calculate the true Horsepower, IHP later has to<br />
be derived to come up with Brake Horsepower<br />
leading also to torque rating at a given RPM.</p>
<p>But for reference sakes,  PLANK/33,000 foot-lbs./minute will allow you to calculate the Indicated Horsepower on a piston engine, which  is defined as:</p>
<p>P = Mean Effective Internal Cylinder Pressure</p>
<p>L = Piston Stroke Length in feet.</p>
<p>A = Piston Surface Area (kept in square inches)</p>
<p>N = Number of Powerstrokes per minute; (on<br />
    four-stroke piston engine this would be<br />
    1/2 the RPM)</p>
<p>K = Number of cylinders.</p>
<p>33,000 foot-lbs/minute = 550 foot-lbs/sec times<br />
60 seconds = Horsepower constant over 1 minute<br />
since RPM is being used.</p>
<p>For calculating Theoretical Horsepower of a<br />
given piston engine, also known as Indicated<br />
Horsepower (IHP), an example will be given<br />
below:</p>
<p>If you have a four-cycle, gasoline-driven,<br />
eight cylinder, V8 automotive piston engine<br />
with a Mean Effective Internal Cylinder Pressure of 195 PSI, bore/stroke of 3.25"/3.00" running at 2500 RPM, calculate the<br />
IHP.</p>
<p>P = 195 PSI</p>
<p>L = 3/12 foot = 1/4 foot = 0.25 feet</p>
<p>A = Pi x (r)squared = 3.14159 x (1.625 x 1.625)  = 8.30 sqaure inches</p>
<p>N = 2500 RPM/2 = 1250 powerstrokes/minute</p>
<p>K = 8 cylinders</p>
<p>(195 x 0.25 x 8.30 x 1250 x 8)/33,000 =<br />
122.61 IHP</p>
<p>        122.61   INDICATED HORSEPOWER</p>
<p>Now if you wanted to get the Brake Horsepower<br />
out of this application, first you would either<br />
have to find out the work (rotational distance time force applied) per 1 revolution of the flywheel divided into (2 x 3.14159) this would get your the torque. Then from there multiply it back to (2 x 3.14159) times the RPM. Whatever that differs from the Indicated Horsepower Calculation, is the Friction Horsepower losses. IHP - Friction HP = BHP.</p>
<p>This also points to the fact that you need motion or speed involved when figuring out Horsepower.  This relates to the Twinkie "Horsepower" question. It would have to be applied to whatever application of 1.68 HP would be. Or 550 foot-lbs/second x 1.68 in terms of time, distance and force exerted within the person who ate that Twinky. So at best the 1.68 HP is just a rough base power rating for the Twinky. How it is expended over time, distance and force exerted is completely abstract. </p>
<p>One last fact regarding Horsepower, is the fact that NO HORSEPOWER exists without a speed or motion of the application being factored into the equation.</p>
<p>A good example of this aside from the previous ones, is turbine jet engines.  It is simple to calculate the theoretical Horsepower rating of given Jet Propulsion Engines. But NO HORSEPOWER exists in any Jet Engine, even at peak thrust output UNLESS the aircraft is in MOTION!!  So a Static Thrust rating (thrust while aircraft is held at rest) regardless to the amount of thrust is ALWAYS ZERO HORSEPOWER.<br />
Only when the aircraft rolls into motion, does the Static Thrust now change into Net Thrust.<br />
Net Thrust is when the given thrust rating is applied AND the aircraft IS in MOTION! Then Horsepower output is developing.</p>
<p>An example of this, is with the following question:</p>
<p>The Boeing 747-200 airliner has a max net thrust rating of 230,000 lbs. Calculate the mechanical horsepower equivalent of the thrust rating output of the four engines on the B747-200, when it is traveling at 500 MHP.</p>
<p>1 Horsepower = 1 lbs. of thrust AT 375 MHP.</p>
<p>375 MHP = 550 feet per second. </p>
<p>This means that 230,000 lbs. of thrust will have a mechanical horsepower equivalent when traveling at 500 MHP of:</p>
<p>500/375 = 1.33</p>
<p>1.33 x 230,000 = 306,666.67</p>
<p>306,666.67 HP IS THE MECHANICAL EQUIVALENT HORSEPOWER RATING OF THE B747-200 WITH 230,000 LBS. OF THRUST MOVING AT 500 MHP.</p>
<p>THERE NEEDS TO BE SPEED OR MOTION INVOLVED IN ANYTHING FOR WHICH A HORSEPOWER RATING IS TO BE CALCULATED. IN PISTON ENGINES IT INVOLVES RPM. IN JET ENGINES IT INVOLVES FORWARD SPEED. WITH THE TWINKY IT MAY APPLIED TO THE AMOUNT OF FORCE THE PERSON EXERTS A CERTAIN DISTANCE. THE CALORIC HEAT RELEASE OF A 300 CALORIE TWINKY WILL ALLOW THE PERSON TO ACCOMPLISH AN "X" AMOUNT OF FORCE APPLIED TO A "X" AMOUNT OF DISTANCE OVER AN "X" AMOUNT OF TIME.</p>
<p>IN ALL TECHNICAL CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS TRAINING FOR ANY OF THESE TECHNOLOGY FIELDS, THERE'S ALWAYS A QUESTION WHERE A RUNNER EATS A HAMBURGER WITH A CERTAIN CALORIE COUNT, AND THE STUDENT IS TOLD TO CALCULATE THE THEORETICAL DISTANCE THIS RUNNER COULD ATTAIN, BASED ON HIS/HER WEIGHT (FORCE) AND THE DISTANCE HE/SHE ACCOMPLISHES OVER TIME, TO THAT CONSUMED HAMBURGER. THAT IS THE SAME THING WITH THIS TWINKY.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://www.rough-equivalents.com/2008/04/how-many-horsepower-in-a-twinkie/comment-page-1/#comment-18</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2008 20:09:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rough-equivalents.com/?p=26#comment-18</guid>
		<description>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_energy

Good call!  I&#039;m just a dumb engineer :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_energy" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_energy</a></p>
<p>Good call!  I'm just a dumb engineer <img src='http://www.rough-equivalents.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://www.rough-equivalents.com/2008/04/how-many-horsepower-in-a-twinkie/comment-page-1/#comment-17</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2008 20:07:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rough-equivalents.com/?p=26#comment-17</guid>
		<description>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie

Or just capitalize the C in Calorie!  Keep up the good work!  Don&#039;t mind me!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie</a></p>
<p>Or just capitalize the C in Calorie!  Keep up the good work!  Don't mind me!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greg Bulmash</title>
		<link>http://www.rough-equivalents.com/2008/04/how-many-horsepower-in-a-twinkie/comment-page-1/#comment-16</link>
		<dc:creator>Greg Bulmash</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2008 19:56:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rough-equivalents.com/?p=26#comment-16</guid>
		<description>@Dave,

That&#039;s why I made sure to specify these as food calories, not simply &quot;calories.&quot;  The calorie count for an item of food is actually in kilocalories.  If a food item has &quot;100 calories,&quot; that&#039;s 100,000 of the calories you&#039;re thinking of.

Probably should have made that clearer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Dave,</p>
<p>That's why I made sure to specify these as food calories, not simply "calories."  The calorie count for an item of food is actually in kilocalories.  If a food item has "100 calories," that's 100,000 of the calories you're thinking of.</p>
<p>Probably should have made that clearer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://www.rough-equivalents.com/2008/04/how-many-horsepower-in-a-twinkie/comment-page-1/#comment-15</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2008 19:32:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rough-equivalents.com/?p=26#comment-15</guid>
		<description>Dude.  While I love this and hate yo burst your bouble a calorie is the amount of heat required to raise the temperature of one gram of water by 1 °C.  Not a kilogram.  So there is really only 0.01339 hp in a twinkie :(</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dude.  While I love this and hate yo burst your bouble a calorie is the amount of heat required to raise the temperature of one gram of water by 1 °C.  Not a kilogram.  So there is really only 0.01339 hp in a twinkie <img src='http://www.rough-equivalents.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':(' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
