I agree substantially with Jason in USMA 21168 and Marcus in USMA 21181

> James Wentworth wrote:
>>The Hz is already used in engineering to denote one rotation.  When I was
>>helping the Poker Flat Research Range obtain a number of surplus Hydra-70 70
>>mm aircraft rockets from the US Army, I noticed in the performance
>>specifications that the rockets' roll rate was expressed in Hz.  The hertz
>>is a perfect "drop-in" replacement for rpm.  I think it isn't used more
>>frequently in mechanical engineering because non-electrical engineers think
>>of it as an electrical unit (just as many American MEs are reluctant to rate
>>combustion engine power in watts because "everybody knows the watt is an
>>electrical unit.").  It's a matter of incorrect perception stemming from
>>ignorance.  --  Jason
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: Ma Be <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

>>> I feel quite strongly that rpm is also another... "idiocy" we could do
>>without (sorry, couldn't find a better adjective for it).  If we are to
>>think of this property as "periodical" we could certainly think of replacing
>>it with Hz (or a prefixed "version" of it, like cHz or mHz).  If we think of
>>"rotational speed" (in angular form) then we'd be talking about this in
>>rad/s, I'd think.


The hertz is simply s^-1.  It is generally used for repetative phenomena;
e.g.   x rev/second = x rev.hertz.  The term "rev" is usually omitted as
understood.  In the case of rad/s the term "rad" would necessary; e.g. x
rad/s = x rad.Hz.
In the case of automobiles, 6000 rpm = 100 rev/s = 100 Hz.

Joseph B.Reid
17 Glebe Road West
Toronto  M5P 1C8             Tel. 416 486-6071

Reply via email to