kPa,

You forget to mention that JPL works in close partnership with NASA, and that 
JPL works in proper SI!!!
There is hope for NASA-JPL for unmanned research into deep space, including 
exploration of Mars.

EAM

________________________________
From: Kilopascal [[email protected]]
Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2013 10:35 PM
To: U.S. Metric Association
Subject: [USMA:52739] RE: NASA mT and K

Is it any wonder that NASA went downhill after Werner von Braun left?  No 
wonder today NASA is on the way out.  How much more time, resources and money 
can this inept organization waste?  If it wasn't for the private companies 
operating in metric, the US Space Program would be defunct by now.

There is a growing number of countries out that that are getting into the Space 
Race.  They all use metric and that makes it easier for them to work together 
and share technology, reduce costs and advance quicker.  NASA's inability to 
get it right assures that they are always on the outside looking in.

Sorry to say, but NASA will never make it to the stars and distant planets.  
Others will but not NASA.  Let's not even wish for them to succeed.  As long as 
they continue to resist metric, the best thing for them and the nation is put 
them out of business.  Let the private metric companies move America forward.  
Keep NASA away before the completely destroy America's chances in space.


[USMA:52739] RE: NASA mT and 
K<http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]&q=subject:%22%5BUSMA%3A52739%5D+RE%3A+NASA+mT+and+K%22>

John (Steele),


We agree that the purpose of  9.80665 meters per second squared is to enables 
deviations from SI, specifically, the deviation of even bothering to define the 
pound-force (lbf).


SP 811 treats the pound-mass as simply the "pound," defining "lbm" as mass, 
only by implication.


We both *reject* the GRC definition of Specific Impulse!  Isp is *not* force 
multiplied by an increment of time divided by weight.  Isp is force times time 
divided by mass.


I do not agree that NASA will carry standard earth gravity (9.0665 meters per 
second squared) to distant planets.  NASA-JPL is already carrying SI Units to 
Mars.  I have doubts that manned flight to Mars can be afforded by the USA 
acting alone or even by all nations of the World acting together.


Eugene Mechtly



 John M. 
Steele<http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]&q=from:%22John+M.+Steele%22>
 Sat, 04 May 2013 14:29:22 
-0700<http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]&q=date:20130504>

There is no division by zero because it is not actual gravity.  It is standard
gravity (roughly sea level, 45°latitude, 9.80665 m/s or equiv in ft/s).  It is
purely an artifact to support lbm and lbf (and happens to be roughly the value
on the surface of the earth).

I reject it too.  I vaguely remember being taught how to work in gravitational
units (mostly through the slug, who measures mass in slugs?), but rejected it
entirely as I became more familiar with metric.  Fortunately my college
insisted
we always work in metric.

NASA will carry (standard) earth gravity to the stars and distant planets where
it will clearly be NOT the nominal local gravity, but remember it is only an
artifact to set unit values.  If I had to compute in gravitational units, I
would undoubtedly make a mistake.  I would change everything to metric, solve,
and change the answer back, but I have tried to force my way through these
scenarios to understand what they are doing.

I'm not really asserting pounds mass and pounds force are equal, but they give
that appearance if you work in gravities.  People who work in gravitational
units have to introduce one artifact, but there are three ways of doing so
yielding three forms of units for f = ma
poundals (lbf x 32.17), lbm, ft/s²
lbf, slugs (lbm/32.17), ft/s²
lbf, lbm, gravities (ft/s² x 1/32.17)
They all do the same thing, introduce standard gravity into F = ma.


________________________________
From: "mechtly, eugene a" <[email protected]>
To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]>
Cc: "mechtly, eugene a" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sat, May 4, 2013 4:39:51 PM
Subject: [USMA:52738] RE: NASA mT and K


John (Steele),


I agree with your observation that some parts of NASA are wedded to
earth-gravitational ideas.

How does NASA-GRC define the Specific Impulse (Isp) of a Rocket Engine
operating
in deep space far from earth's gravity field where the value of g and W
approach
zero?  i.e. where  W = m g and W also approaches zero?

Would they still define Isp as thrust integrated over a short interval of time
divided by weight (W)?  or would they divide by mass, respecting CGPM
resolutions and avoiding the infinity arising from division by zero?
Where is the GRC "g" evaluated in  W = m g?

It is the NASA-GRC "definition" of Specific Impulse that I reject.  The GRC
equations contradict the CGPM resolution declaring the distinction between mass
and weight (defined as a force).

I do not agree with your assertion that mass and force are the same thing
if...(under any circumstance you select)!
It is true that the numerical values of mass and weight can be forced to be
equal by introducing a contrived multiplication or division factor, but that
*manipulation* does not make the quantities mass and force equal!
Only the numerical values can be made equal in a hybrid non-system of units,
e.g. where 10 lbf = 10 lbm.

There are many other abuses of unit names and unit symbols in the MSFC article
on Ares V and in the GRC
article on Isp which deviate from standards on SI, too numerous to mention!

Eugene Mechtly


________________________________

From: Kilopascal [[email protected]]
Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2013 8:15 AM
To: U.S. Metric Association
Subject: [USMA:52737] RE: NASA mT and K


They use the dreaded sec instead of s for seconds.

[USMA:52737] RE: NASA mT and K
John M. Steele Sat, 04 May 2013 04:59:16 -0700
I think this "derivation" of specific impulse proves NASA is fundamentally
wedded to US Customary and gravitational unit systems.  Metric is just a glossy

conversion at the end to show EO12770 compliance.
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/k-12/airplane/specimp.html  At any rate, they mean
burn time with the available fuel, assuming constant  thrust and fuel flow, it
reduces to thrust multiplied by burn time divided by  fuel mass, or real
specific impulse divided by earth gravity.  Mass and force  ARE the same thing
if acceleration is divided by earth gravities.  There are  three ways to "fake"
coherence of F = ma in Customary, poundals, slugs, or  gravities.  Poundals are
mostly British, and most of us learned slugs in high  school but NASA uses
gravities.  For me, learning metric was slugicide, have  killed them on sight
ever since.

Reply via email to