Null


GAWnCA

  • Karma: +1/-1
Torque vs Horsepower
« on: January 01, 2008, 05:29:21 PM »
I found the following to be very interesting and I hope you do to.

The word horsepower was introduced by James Watt, the inventor of the steam engine in about 1775. Watt learned that "a strong horse could lift 150 pounds a height of 220 feet in 1 minute." One horsepower is also commonly expressed as 550 pounds one foot in one second or 33,000 pounds one foot in one minute. These are just different ways of saying the same thing. Notice these definitions includes force (pounds), distance (feet), and time, (minute, second). A horse could hold weight in a static position but this would not be considered horsepower, it would be similar to what we call torque. Adding time and distance to a static force (or to torque) results in horsepower. RPM, revolutions (distance) per minute (time), is today's equivalent of time and distance. Back to horses, imagine a horse raising coal out of a coal mine. A horse exerting one horsepower could raise 550 pounds of coal one foot every second.

Here is an example of another way horsepower could be directly measured. Say you have a horse hitched to a plow. In the hitch is a spring scale (like a fish scale). The horse pulls the plow one foot every second and you see 550 pounds on the scale. That horse would be generating one horsepower.

We see horsepower can be directly measured. However there is a problem directly measuring horsepower of modern day internal combustion engines because they produce rotary motion not linear motion, and unless the engine is geared down, the speed at which they do work (time and distance or RPM) is too great for practical direct measurement of horsepower. It seems logical then that the solution was to directly measure torque (rotational force eventually expressed in pounds at one foot radius) and RPM (time and distance, i.e. distance in circumference at the one foot radius) and from these calculate horsepower. Torque and RPM are easily measured directly. Early dynamometers used a brake device to load the engine. A torque arm was attached to this brake's stator. The brake's rotor was coupled to the engine's crankshaft. A spring scale or other measuring device connected the torque arm to the stationary fixture holding the engine and brake. During a test the brake's application loaded the engine. Torque and engine rpm were observed and recorded.


The water brake is the circular aluminum object in the foreground. Bolted to the near side of the water brake is the torque arm. The end of the torque arm can be seen at the right side of the stand holding the brake. The brake is mounted on bearings and tries to turn with the engine during a test causing the torque arm to rise. There is a "torque cylinder" (a special oil filled hydraulic cylinder) on the right side that connects the torque arm to the water brake mount. The pushing up on the torque cylinder forces the oil into the big guage seen on the control console. Torque can be read off this guage. Also on the oil line from the torque cylinder is a pressure transducer which sends the pressure signal to the data acquisition computer. There is a pulse generator in the middle of the picture. It is driven off the water brake rotor and provides the RPM signal. The test engine is connected to the water brake with a driveshaft.

On modern day dynamometers horsepower is a calculated value. It's important to remember the dyno measures torque and rpm and then from these calculates horsepower. On the dyno it takes more water flow to the water brake to increase the load on the engine being tested. As the test engine's torque rises more water flow is needed. As the test engine's torque drops less water flow is needed. The dyno's water brake does not respond to Horsepower. Major adjustments to water flow are needed as an engine crosses its torque peak but none are needed as it crosses its horsepower peak. In other words the water flow to the brake during a dyno test follows the engines torque curve and not its horsepower curve. Torque is what twists the tire, prop, or pump. Horsepower helps us understand an amount or quantity of torque. (Torque + time and distance)

Now if we are measuring torque and RPM how can we calculate horsepower? Where does the equation HP=TORQUE * RPM / 5252 come from? We will use Watts observation of one horsepower as 150 pounds, 220 feet in one minute. First we need express 150 pounds of force as foot pounds torque.

    * Pretend the force of 150 pounds is "applied" tangentially to a one foot radius circle. This would be 150 foot pounds torque.

Next we need to express 220 feet in one minute as RPM.

    * The circumference of a one foot radius circle is 6.283186 feet. ft. (Pi x diameter 3.141593 * 2 feet)
    * The distance of 220 feet, divided by 6.283185 feet, gives us a RPM of 35.014.

We are then talking about 150 pounds of force (150 foot pounds torque), 35 RPM, and one horsepower.

Constant (X) = 150 ft.lbs. * 35.014 RPM / 1hp

35.014 * 150 / 1 = 5252.1

5252 is the constant.

So then hp = torque * RPM / 5252

Here is another way; Remember we know 150 foot pounds and 35.014 RPM = one horsepower

1hp is to 150 ft.lbs. * 35.014 RPM as X hp is to observed ft.lbs.torque * observed RPM

Example; We dyno test and observe 400 ft.lbs. torque at 5000 RPM

1 hp is to 150 ft.lbs. * 35.014 RPM as X hp is to 400 ft.lbs. * 5000 RPM

When we cross multiply X hp * (150 ft.lbs. * 35.014 RPM) = 1hp * (400 ft.lbs. * 5000 RPM)

X hp * (5252 ft.lbs. RPM) = 1 hp * (2,000,000 ft.lbs. RPM)

Divide both sides by 5252 ft.lbs. RPM

X hp = 1 hp * 380.80

X hp = 380.80 hp

Horsepower = torque x rpm / 5252

Here's an interesting bit of trivia; below 5252 rpm any engine's torque number will always be higher than its horsepower number, and above 5252 rpm any engine's horsepower number will always be higher than its torque number. At 5252 rpm the horsepower and torque numbers will be exactly the same.
  • Like
    Dislike
    Love
    HaHa
    Angry
    Surprise
    Sad
    Party
~Greg
Forgive your enemies.  It messes up their heads.

Oldsquirt

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Torque vs Horsepower
« Reply #1 on: January 01, 2008, 06:04:44 PM »
Interesting information, but you really should credit the "source" of the document.


Horsepower = torque x rpm / 5252

Here's an interesting bit of trivia; below 5252 rpm any engine's torque number will always be higher than its horsepower number, and above 5252 rpm any engine's horsepower number will always be higher than its torque number. At 5252 rpm the horsepower and torque numbers will be exactly the same.

This bit I have quoted is not exactly "trivia". In fact, the mathmatical equation, for any one who has a moderate grasp of math, states those facts directly. What is important to know and understand is that the crossing of the curves at 5252rpm is of absolutely no signifigance to the design or operation of the engine at all. It is strictly the result of the relative magnitude of the units used for Power and Torque. If one were to change to the commonly used metric equivalents, the constant, and therefore the RPM at which the numbers are equal, would change to reflect the difference in magnitude of the metric units.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2008, 06:20:29 PM by Oldsquirt »
  • Like
    Dislike
    Love
    HaHa
    Angry
    Surprise
    Sad
    Party

GAWnCA

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Torque vs Horsepower
« Reply #2 on: January 01, 2008, 06:20:16 PM »
For your benefit, there was no name given for this information, only a web site.  I said it was interesting.  Math is a constant.
  • Like
    Dislike
    Love
    HaHa
    Angry
    Surprise
    Sad
    Party
~Greg
Forgive your enemies.  It messes up their heads.

2savage4you

  • Karma: +14/-1
Re: Torque vs Horsepower
« Reply #3 on: January 01, 2008, 06:22:28 PM »
OK  cool picture of the engine, but the dizzy is in backwards. And after reading this i feel all phucked up


Maybe its the beer ???

Nope dont think so

2sav
  • Like
    Dislike
    Love
    HaHa
    Angry
    Surprise
    Sad
    Party

Oldsquirt

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Torque vs Horsepower
« Reply #4 on: January 01, 2008, 06:23:25 PM »
In that case, just a simple "found this at--fill in name of site---" would suffice. It's nice if an author gets credit for his/her work. It's also nice to be able to go to the source and see if there is anything else of interest to read.


Not sure I understand your "math is a constant" remark?
  • Like
    Dislike
    Love
    HaHa
    Angry
    Surprise
    Sad
    Party

hotrod56cars

  • Karma: +1/-8
Re: Torque vs Horsepower
« Reply #5 on: January 01, 2008, 06:51:09 PM »
... Not sure I understand your "math is a constant" remark?

I think he meant math is always constant, i.e.: 1 + 1 = 2 (never changes)
  • Like
    Dislike
    Love
    HaHa
    Angry
    Surprise
    Sad
    Party
Quote
NO REGRET$ ... Arguing on the internet is like competing in the Special Olympics / no matter how good you do you're still retarded!!!!!

                                                          1978  19' Mach 1 Tunnel jet

Jetaholic

  • Karma: +3/-0
Re: Torque vs Horsepower
« Reply #6 on: January 01, 2008, 06:55:37 PM »
OK  cool picture of the engine, but the dizzy is in backwards.

No it isn't
  • Like
    Dislike
    Love
    HaHa
    Angry
    Surprise
    Sad
    Party
To err is human, to forgive divine...except for running Fords ;D

F - Found
O - On
R - River
D - Dead

Oldsquirt

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Torque vs Horsepower
« Reply #7 on: January 02, 2008, 11:03:01 AM »
I think he meant math is always constant, i.e.: 1 + 1 = 2 (never changes)

Perhaps we could let him explain his remark? ;)

I asked because the formula itself contains a "constant", in this case the number "5252", and it ONLY APPLIES when using the Power and Torque units of HP and LB-FT. If you were to change to the metric(aka SI) units, the "constant" changes to approximately "9545". This means that the point where the Power and Torque numbers are equal changes to that same RPM. BTW, I say approximately because it depends on how many decimal places you carry each number out to in the conversion. Using 1 HP = .746 Kilowatts and 1 lb-ft torque = 1.356 Newton-meters, the constant calculates to "9546". I have also seen it as "9543" and "9549".

So, in metric units, the formula becomes: Kilowatts = Newton-meters x RPM/9546
« Last Edit: January 02, 2008, 11:08:36 AM by Oldsquirt »
  • Like
    Dislike
    Love
    HaHa
    Angry
    Surprise
    Sad
    Party

GAWnCA

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Torque vs Horsepower
« Reply #8 on: January 02, 2008, 11:29:26 AM »
Perhaps we could let him explain his remark? ;)

I asked because the formula itself contains a "constant", in this case the number "5252", and it ONLY APPLIES when using the Power and Torque units of HP and LB-FT. If you were to change to the metric(aka SI) units, the "constant" changes to approximately "9545". This means that the point where the Power and Torque numbers are equal changes to that same RPM. BTW, I say approximately because it depends on how many decimal places you carry each number out to in the conversion. Using 1 HP = .746 Kilowatts and 1 lb-ft torque = 1.356 Newton-meters, the constant calculates to "9546". I have also seen it as "9543" and "9549".

So, in metric units, the formula becomes: Kilowatts = Newton-meters x RPM/9546

Ok, 1 + 1 DOES always = 2  even in the metric world.

Now you want to be a critic and switch to the metric system.  How many in America use the metric system to measure anything other than in the scientific world.  Good night.  IT was an article explaining HP in AMERICAN terms!  You want everything to be APPLES except when YOU want to nit pick and convert to oranges!
« Last Edit: January 02, 2008, 11:31:49 AM by GAWnCA »
  • Like
    Dislike
    Love
    HaHa
    Angry
    Surprise
    Sad
    Party
~Greg
Forgive your enemies.  It messes up their heads.

Oldsquirt

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Torque vs Horsepower
« Reply #9 on: January 02, 2008, 11:40:15 AM »
Don't misunderstand . I was NEVER being a critic. I was trying to point out the insignifigance of the "5252" as far as how one goes about building or setting up and engine for any specific purpose. That number has been misused and misunderstood by far too many individuals in the past. As I tried to say before, that "constant" only applies to one set of measurement "units", in this case Horsepower and Pound-Feet. If the relative size of the "units", not the number, changes, so to does the "constant". If Watt had chosen a different number for his definition of HP, then the  number "5252" would not be the "constant" in the HP/Tq formula. The example of the metric units should make that quite clear.

I'd still like to know what site the article came from to see if there is any other interesting reading.
  • Like
    Dislike
    Love
    HaHa
    Angry
    Surprise
    Sad
    Party

GAWnCA

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Torque vs Horsepower
« Reply #10 on: January 02, 2008, 11:46:12 AM »
Just do a search on any of the search engines for Torque vs Horsepower or 5252 and you can read all you want.

Blame James Watt for the formula, he invented it and developed the numbers based on what a horse could do, hence the term HORSE POWER.
  • Like
    Dislike
    Love
    HaHa
    Angry
    Surprise
    Sad
    Party
~Greg
Forgive your enemies.  It messes up their heads.

Oldsquirt

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Torque vs Horsepower
« Reply #11 on: January 02, 2008, 12:00:45 PM »
Again, I brought up the metric system only to point out that if you change the SIZE of the units, the formula comes out with a different constant. The actual real world output doesn't change, just the number and magnitude of the units chosen to report it.

So, tell me, since you seem to be bothered by my statements regarding the "5252" constant in the formula, do YOU feel that there is any REAL signifigance to the "5252" number? If so, please explain.

  • Like
    Dislike
    Love
    HaHa
    Angry
    Surprise
    Sad
    Party

GAWnCA

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Torque vs Horsepower
« Reply #12 on: January 02, 2008, 12:17:01 PM »
Again, I brought up the metric system only to point out that if you change the SIZE of the units, the formula comes out with a different constant. The actual real world output doesn't change, just the number and magnitude of the units chosen to report it.

So, tell me, since you seem to be bothered by my statements regarding the "5252" constant in the formula, do YOU feel that there is any REAL signifigance to the "5252" number? If so, please explain.

Seems to me you just want to argue with an article I posted.  I thought it was interesting and want to share it.  I don't live in a country that uses the metric system of measurement and the formula wasn't based on the metric system.  I would venture to say, that in those countries where metrics are the norm, they use this formula, converted to metrics and back again, to advertise HP in America.  1 + 1 still equals 2
  • Like
    Dislike
    Love
    HaHa
    Angry
    Surprise
    Sad
    Party
~Greg
Forgive your enemies.  It messes up their heads.

Oldsquirt

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Torque vs Horsepower
« Reply #13 on: January 02, 2008, 12:26:00 PM »
Sorry. NOT arguing with the article. Never was. I think it is a nice piece showing how the formula was derived. I was doing nothing but trying to clarify that NO signifigance, other than mathematics, should be given to the 5252 number. It is clear you do not understand my point. Metric system was, and I seem to have to repeat myself, brought up only to help illustrate that fact. No more, no less.
  • Like
    Dislike
    Love
    HaHa
    Angry
    Surprise
    Sad
    Party

AA/Paul

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Torque vs Horsepower
« Reply #14 on: January 03, 2008, 10:30:07 AM »
My buddy is coming out with a book about dyno's and clears up a lot of misconceptions about hp tq .
To quote him from a Hot Rod mag a couple yrs ago....tq without hp is a dumptruck. ::)
       '     '     '     '   Chevy HP mag 2 months ago...#'s only mean something if you know where they came from.
 Thanx for the info!!! O0
  • Like
    Dislike
    Love
    HaHa
    Angry
    Surprise
    Sad
    Party
Redneck Punk
If illegal aliens are undocumented migrant workers.....then Drug dealers are unlicensed pharmacys

If ya can't fix it with a hammer....It's an electrical problem!

GAWnCA

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Torque vs Horsepower
« Reply #15 on: January 03, 2008, 10:35:50 AM »
M#'s only mean something if you know where they came from.
 Thanx for the info!!! O0

A truer statement was never made.  That's why I hate polls and people who spout staticitics and not give you where they got the numbers.
  • Like
    Dislike
    Love
    HaHa
    Angry
    Surprise
    Sad
    Party
~Greg
Forgive your enemies.  It messes up their heads.

 


Null

SMFPacks CMS 1.0.3 © 2026