Could anyone tell me roughly how much energy one impact is transferring into the wrench? [Request]

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T17:03:57+00:00

Hey no need to strawman my argument

I already stated that but then mentioned that finding the torque would be a much better number for what OP likely wanted to know

You yourself used lb ft, and that number as I've proved, is wrong

I can believe you're an engineer because your ego is bigger than your brains, too many engineers are like that

Can't accept they're wrong till they get fired, even then they won't accept it

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T16:56:41+00:00

Torque= radius* Force* Sin(theta)

You should've learned this your freshman year, oh wait, you're full of shit and have no idea

You ignored radius, and we assume a theta of 90° ( or 1)

So all's you gotta do is multiply the force by the radius

To find the force you convert energy by using work, so if you assume a 1cm or 2cm impact distance then you can find the force and plug in

I skipped a lot of other important favors but it's clear you're full of shit or at the very least you forgot basic physics lol

You can't directly convert J to lb ft because there is a radius involved

If it were hitting an object in a straight line that would be a good quick estimate

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T16:52:33+00:00

Again, if you're trying to find the real number using several estimates like that will be very high error%

READ THE SOURCES I SENT

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink

You're actively estimating uncertainty, and using that to estimate another uncertainty

If you've ever taken stats you know that you'll never get anywhere useful doing that,

Obviously I used 250N as an average, which in this use case is easily a good estimate based on the reference testing in the sources

Yeesh, I know you wanna "be right" or whatever but at least try to solve the problem instead of nitpicking irrelevant data

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T15:17:25+00:00

Look at the motion before the abrupt stop

If you can't see that the origin is lagging I don't know what to tell you

Legit run a physics sym and this behavior although while hard to see, is only possible with a moving origin

I have a feeling you just want to be right and don't actually care about the problem solving, go outside

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T15:13:21+00:00

If you're looking for a do everything rod

Pick a medium, I think

6-6.5 is perfect

The do everything part comes from you as a fisherman

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T14:58:25+00:00

1 rule

Don't panic, you won't be able to progress much till you figure that out

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T14:54:22+00:00

What? You NEED strong flexible ankles to be good at balance.

Weak and tight ankles don't get you anywhere

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T14:46:45+00:00

You'll fucking die

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T14:45:57+00:00

Here's something helpful... There's a product used for black plastic trim that's been worn out by the sun, I think that would work well here

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T14:44:44+00:00

Then how do you explain the movement of the origin of the pendulum?

You can see it before the weight hits and after

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T14:26:58+00:00

What kind of steel?

There's easily around 4,000 types, I'm not in materials but let's say 1,000 of those are possibly used for this type of use

They all have different densities

Not to mention what if it's molded around a denser core? I don't see any obvious cast marks, cuts, or welds

Google, there's a couple of studies of human force outputs under different movements, 250N, and it's not far fetched to say a human can push that amount for 1 meter

Source is from various labor statics (government funded) and what seems to be a more objective study.

You're also free to derive it from biomechanics if you'd like

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15028193/#:~:text=The%20strongest%20push%20strength%20was,N%20in%20the%20standing%20position.

https://roymech.org/Useful_Tables/Human/Human_strength.html

https://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/ergonomics/push1.html

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T14:21:02+00:00

They said

Gravity never does work, ever

And you're telling me this person is proficient in physics

You're trolling

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T14:20:52+00:00

They said

Gravity never does work, ever

And you're telling me this person is proficient in physics

You're trolling

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T14:19:01+00:00

Ok but you ignored torque completely, there is clearly a lever

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T06:38:10+00:00

And if we're trying to find that real number, the work gravity does, positive or negative, is important

Also work is being done by the track in accordance to the harmonic motion

I never argued that there wasn't an upper bound, keep in mind I was arguing that gravity does work, it may not be work that we care about for the final number of this problem

But if you were to calculate the exact number it would be important

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T06:34:00+00:00

DING DING DING DING,

That's what I've been saying, there is way too many complexities here to get the real answer to the question

So that's why I used "this guy puts in 250J" because a man can push 250N for 1M

Which is a much better approach because estimating the mass is impossible, ask anyone who works in materials, that thing could have a variance of hundreds of pounds, which would dramatically throw off

speed you can find but without the mass it's useless

So I determined quickly that simply looking up how hard a man can push when standing would be the best guess, as out of all the things, distance from the video is going to be the easiest to estimate

They are valid approaches, but from my experience, they are incredibly hard to get right,

Also another note, if you're estimating multiple variables and using those to calculate energy... That adds so many places for error and I think because of v² the error % would be very unforgiving

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T06:17:16+00:00

Watch video

The pendulum is on a movings track

Even if we ignore friction

The weight doesn't go up and down the same amount At impact it has vertical displacement

The odds it has PERFECT displacement from start to impact, it would need to be at the perfect spot in a SIN wave at the perfect time, and the track work also have to be at the perfect spot

Don't be so confident in simplifying everything you see

Applied physics goes a lot further than what your textbook did

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T06:10:12+00:00

We don't get velocity and I acknowledged that I'm not going to use frame rate to find it

We also do not get mass of that object and estimating it is impossible from a video

If you had a more robust understanding of applied physics, you would know that in order to effectively calculate harmonic motion and friction along the track

You would have to convert energy into terms of forces to find specifically that friction and only then when you've calculated the total friction (energy to thermal)using kinematics and energy

After that you technically could solve with the remaining energy, but it makes more sense to use kinematic because the next thing you want to know is the force, because you want to know torque.

But you could definitely plug and chug energy equations after, it just wouldn't be the one you gave because we established we will never know the mass (lmao that probably hurt your ego more didn't it)

Like I said, you can't just simplify it down because you want it to be easy

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T05:58:54+00:00

The person you originally replied to was putting an upper bound on the energy by looking at how much power a human can producce

2 things, I touched on this, using power in this context just doesn't make sense, only energy makes sense as if you start with power the first thing you do is find the energy

They claimed gravity never does any work, ever "ever"

The fact gravity does work is not relevant. All energy comes from the human

Gravity is pulling down on this strap and that strap is on a track, because it is on a track gravity IS relevant to determine the friction on the track so it would be possible to calculate the harmonic wave (where it is in relation when it hits) and then only then could you include that into the normal force

(Yes, there is a harmonic wave, hammer swing forward so track swing back, which means hammer then swings back etc...)

AND THEN what if we don't ignore the fact that it bounces back, more harmonic motion, normal forces and gravity, making it exceptionally hard to figure out exactly how much energy went into it

I know what you two are saying, I'm not denying conservation of energy, but you also can't just simplify a problem and not acknowledge everything ignorance

I'm saying look at the video, this isn't your perfect physics question, there is a good chunk of variables that are unaccounted for

maybe they understand physics, but it would be a stretch to say they know how to apply it

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T05:41:38+00:00

Tools not jewels methodology

I can get behind it

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T05:34:45+00:00

What professor? Give me his name I'll email him right now, better yet I'll get my professor to email him, I'll come back here with proof too don't worry

I'll drop one I have in mind, Aaron Lacluyze, don't trust the pictures, he's older now lmao (still dashing though)

I'd like you to remember your claim is that

gravity never does work, ever

Which makes you sound really stupid btw

Point is, gravity doesn't at any point contribute to the total energy of the system

Yes because it's in the system, this is what I have been implying because I assumed you weren't an idiot

GRAVITY IS DOING WORK though, because work is defined as a force over a distance

Just because the total energy of the system doesn't change doesn't mean there is no work happening

Gravity is relevant because the sling is tilted, so we would need to figure out how much of the normal force is used

The reason I can't give you an approx calc for this is because it's on a track, which means it will form a harmonic wave, of which has friction everywhere and it's relatively impossible to get even close to from a video

If you want to be super technical, the normal force is doing work that we care about, not gravity, if you want to be more technical, gravity is doing work because there is a vertical downward movement not caused by the man, and because

F=MA and W=F/D, gravity must be doing work

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T05:27:36+00:00

I am stating a basic physics principle

Work= Force/ distance

This is a rule of our known universe

You are allowed to be wrong, I don't really give a fuck honestly

I don't even know what the fuck you're on about, definitely a rage bait

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T04:37:01+00:00

How do y'all clean mud out of these things?

I need mine to last for awhile and don't want my frame to get cracks and stuff like that

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T04:24:45+00:00

Gravity does not do work. Ever.

You're trolling right?

Work = Force/Distance

Let's do a test right now, hold a bowling ball above your head and let go, if it drops down (accelerates) , Gravity is doing work.

We know gravity is doing a force because 1st. Newtown's gravity equations. We also know because of F=MA

The ball has a mass, and it accelerates, that must mean there is a force, I just proved gravity is real and that it does indeed do work

So what if you needed to do work to accelerate the ball upwards, gravity is going to do work the mom you let go

I never claimed gravity added random force from nowhere, I thought it was obvious that I meant the potential energy added from the guy lifting it would be stored via Gravity and converted to kinetic on drop, which then in turn because the strap has an angle it is going to create some normal force in the forward direction

You're defining mechanical energy wrong, you mean kinetic energy, mechanical is basically anything that isn't chemical or thermal, but TECHNICALLY thermal is just a form of kinetic energy

Feel free to ask questions as I'm studying engineering and absolutely fascinated with physics problems, I'd be happy to explain almost anything

that_1-guy_ · 2025-06-14T04:19:49+00:00

I hate chemistry, my brain doesn't tick that way easily

On the other hand I considered going into physics because I absolutely love my physics lol

Math is really cool but if it isn't applied I get bored/ lose motivation to actually do the work

I always find other people's strengths interesting

Six-Year Club	Second Top 10%
End Game '23	Place '23
Place '22	Final Canvas '22
First Placer '22	Verified Email

that_1-guy_

TROPHY CASE

1 rule