(Part 3) Best engineering & transportation books according to redditors
We found 8,895 Reddit comments discussing the best engineering & transportation books. We ranked the 3,617 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the products ranked 41-60. You can also go back to the previous section.
Forgive the cheap plug, but I just wrote a whole book on this, to appear in Feb 2012, titles "Space Chronicles".
I originally called it "Failure to Launch" but the publishers nixed the title, citing it was too depressing.
Here's the listing for a pre-order, if interested. http://www.amazon.com/Space-Chronicles-Facing-Ultimate-Frontier/dp/0393082105
Material science and textiles, while extremely related are quite different in the classroom. I had MSE classes and my intro textbook was the one below. It mainly dealt with materials on a molecular level, while the textile courses consisted of the processes involved with creating the fabrics.
https://www.amazon.com/Materials-Science-Engineering-Introduction-8th/dp/0470419970
Fail button is to deselect the menu options on the LCD Display
Source: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Red-Bull-Racing-Manual-Championship-winning/dp/0857330993
Screenshot from mine:
http://i.imgur.com/a6MDY.jpg
Here's my rough list of textbook recommendations. There are a ton of Dover paperbacks that I didn't put on here, since they're not as widely used, but they are really great and really cheap.
Amazon search for Dover Books on mathematics
There's also this great list of undergraduate books in math that has become sort of famous: https://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~abhishek/chicmath.htm
Pre-Calculus / Problem-Solving
Calculus
Linear Algebra
Differential Equations
Number Theory
Proof-Writing
Analysis
Complex Analysis
Functional Analysis
Partial Differential Equations
Higher-dimensional Calculus and Differential Geometry
Abstract Algebra
Geometry
Topology
Set Theory and Logic
Combinatorics / Discrete Math
Graph Theory
P. S., if you Google search any of the topics above, you are likely to find many resources. You can find a lot of lecture notes by searching, say, "real analysis lecture notes filetype:pdf site:.edu"
Space Chronicles by Neil deGrasse Tyson.
Looks good!
STEM generates wealth. Good message.
But apace advocates have been saying this since the 1960's. Neil's not bringing anything new to the table. This 2012 testimony didn't generate much support from policy makers. Neither did the book he published in 2012.
Space advocates can point to huge benefits generated by research from the 1950's and 60's. Not all of it was NASA R&D. Some of it was military and commercial. A few of the more prominent:
Miniaturization of electronics -- Rockets and missiles needed compact, low mass electronics. U.S. funded R&D helped put American companies at the forefront of an electronics revolution. There were already transistor radios around when NASA formed but the R&D helped accelerate trends like Moore's Law.
Communication sats. Generally not NASA's but it's hard to imagine commerical entities launching satellites if NASA and the U.S. military hadn't blazed a trail. These are huge beneficial spin off from the space program.
Weather sats. Again, not NASA but enabled by development of launch technology More accurate weather prediction has saved lives, prevented property damage and enabled farmers to produce more food.
Will future NASA endeavors generate such dramatic spin offs? If that could be solidly demonstrated, it'd be easier to persuade policy makers. I certainly don't regard it as a given.
One of the rallying cries has been Colonize Mars! With huge, disposable rockets like the SLS. Basically Apollo rockets redux. The Apollo trips to the moon were about 10 billion a pop. It is likely SLS trips to Mars every two years would be even more expensive. Settling Mars would take a long sustained effort taking decades or maybe even centuries. Would policy makers support that sustained effort? An expensive, high profile program would be a lightning rod for policy makers that want to appear fiscally responsible. I'd give the program two presidential cycles. Agaiin, Apollo redux.
Some critics maintain the chief benefit of SLS and Orion is providing employment in certain congressional districts. Pork, in other words. I tend to agree. I don't think NASA is blazing new trails with SLS and Orion.
Many serious proponents of exploiting and settling space call for improved robotics and In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU). Already British Petroleum is using remotely operated vehicles to build sophisticated infrastructure on the sea floor where humans can't reach. Should NASA invest heavily in improved tele-robots, this could potentially generate enormous spin offs. I can see tele-robot operaters donning their motion capture suits in their living rooms. No need to commute to work. Besides working on the lunar surface or on asteroids, tele-robot operatros could do work in the deeper mines, high mountain tops, the sea floor. As well as hazardous disaster areas like Fukashima after a tsunami.
Summary: "A penny for NASA" is too simplistic. Some NASA projects might have big pay offs. Others are likely dead ends. If we want to persuade policy makers and fire up the public, we need to place our bets on good horses.
If you want to really do your homework, start with the primary source. The name of these structures comes from Gerald K. O'Neill, and his work The High Frontier: Human Colonies in Space.
I believe this book has been referenced at least once on the channel. I haven't read it myself, but you could do worse than starting there.
Mark's Handbook for Mechanical Engineers
this book covers the bread and butter of what CHE is. Which is mass/energy balances (basically, what goes in equals what comes out.)
you can start with that and later move onto the more "advanced" topics such as transport, thermo, fluids, etc etc
Elementary Principles of Chemical Processes
https://www.amazon.com/Elementary-Principles-Chemical-Processes-Richard/dp/047168757X
Skunk Works by Ben Rich - This book is probably one of the best reads in aerospace engineering. It tells the story of one of America’s premier aerospace research and development labs, Skunkworks at Lockheed Martin. They built such famous aircraft like the SR-71, U-2, F-80, F-114. I review the book here.
​
If you are looking for more of a textbook, Introduction to Flight by Anderson is one of the best. It's a bit on the expensive side but there's an international paperback edition that's much cheaper if you're outside of the US.
​
If you want something a bit between Skunkworks and Introduction to Flight, there's Ignition by John D. Clark which is all about the development of liquid rocket propellent.
It is actually a slightly confusing title, as it's principally a biography rather than the workshop manual (which also exists) https://www.amazon.co.uk/Red-Bull-Racing-Manual-Championship-winning/dp/0857330993
The obvious choice is the introductory holy bible of MSE. If you already know the basics of how materials are categorized and behave, that book /u/Tartarus116 posted looks pretty good.
The redbull owners manual: http://www.amazon.com/Red-Bull-Racing-Formula-Manual/dp/0857330993
>I'm not sure what kinds of other heavy scientific computing you've done, but CFD is a very difficult field and takes years to understand.
CFD isn't this difficult.
On one side you have partial differential equations (PDEs) describing fluid flow. On the other side you have numerical methods used to solve those PDEs. Put the two together, implement it in code, and you get a rudimentary CFD simulation. For CS students, who typically already have knowledge of numerical methods, coding one of these basic simulations can be done within a semester's worth of focused effort. Venturing into finer, more complex domains and trying to model more advanced flow phenomenons do indeed require years of study, but a beginner -- a 3rd year CS undergrad of all people -- has no need to deal with that stuff when all they want to accomplish is to get their feet wet with the inner workings of the simplest CFD simulation.
So let's not intimidate the poor kid and not oversell the profession. A lot of people love pretending like this stuff is black magic, presumably because it promotes job security, but it just isn't. There are lots of people doing CFD that come from CS and Applied Math backgrounds instead of Engineering or Physics. They all started somewhere. So can the OP.
-------------------------------------
@ /u/AnotherBrownBike
Khan Academy Physics, Fluid Dynamics lectures are your best friend in this.
I would recommend that you start with getting a decent physical understanding of incompressible (also called divergence-free) advection-diffusion equation. This is a simple PDE that describes how particles (or other quantities like energy) are transferred inside a physical system due to the process of diffusion and advection (aka convection). Solving this equation using a numerical solution method for PDEs (such as finite volume or finite element) will allow you to practice the fundamental underpinnings of a CFD code.
Finite Volume methods are more popular in CFD than finite element methods, because they're mathematically easier for people who have a robust understanding of fluid mechanics. That's not going to be the case for you, because you're not studying fluids academically. I would recommend that you focus on finite element methods instead. These are mathematically more challenging -- using them with fluid PDEs require stabilization terms (like SUPG or GLS) to prevent the solution from oscillating. However, the application of finite element methods to fluid PDEs require essentially no knowledge of the physics behind the PDE. It's pure mathematics, and you as a CS student should be well equipped to handle this.
If you're not familiar with finite element methods for solving PDEs, I would strongly recommend starting with a Python library called FEniCS. This is a brilliant finite element solver that allows you to input the bilinear form of your partial differential equation (Google what "bilinear form" is for finite element methods) in Python and generate a solution. This will allow you to practice the mathematics of finite element methods without getting tangled up in the code implementation of the solution process. Solve the Poisson equation first, and then the advection-diffusion.
Simple solvers you might like working with:
EasyCFD -- Educational program intended to teach the basics of a "black-box" CFD solver.
CFD Python -- A Python program designed with a 12-step lesson plan to solving Navier-Stokes equations.
PyFR -- Another Python-based flow solver. Documentation is a bit sparse, so you need an understanding of how CFD works to use it. But once you have that, PyFR's open-source nature allows you to break apart an actual full CFD solver and look at its components before trying to write your own.
Useful literature you might want to check out from your campus library:
White, Fluid Mechanics and/or Cengel and Cimbala, Fluid Mechanics -- Basically the two beginner level fluid mechanics bibles, depending on who you ask. An overwhelming number of engineers out there have had one or the other as their textbook in school. They're both fantastic. Flip a coin.
Moin, Fundamentals of Engineering Numerical Analysis -- Yet another undergraduate bible, this time on numerical methods commonly used by engineers (of all types). It covers material so crucial in all scientific computing that one of my doctoral qualification examiners specifically requested that I know this book from cover to cover.
Anderson, Computational Fluid Dynamics -- Superb introductory book that covers most everything related to CFD. If you're going to buy anything in this list, buy this one.
Hughes, Finite Element Methods -- The bible on finite element methods. The book focuses on structural applications (which do not require stabilization terms) but the mathematics involved are identical regardless of the physics behind the PDE, so this is still a very useful reference.
Zienkiewicz, Taylor and Nithiarasu, Finite Element Method for Fluid Dynamics -- Great supplement to Hughes' book for anyone using FEM on fluid flow. Covers stabilized methods, starting with easy equations (like advection-diffusion) and scaling up all the way to turbulent flows (which you shouldn't bother with right now).
Anderson, Fundamentals of Aerodynamics -- Just putting this down in case you ever need to specifically learn about aerodynamic applications of fluid flow.
Anderson, Introduction to Flight -- Used nationwide as an introductory aerospace engineering book. I recommend it to everybody outside of the industry who wants to work/study in it. Superfluously covers every aspect of the discipline, from structures to propulsion, from aerodynamics to flight control, from aviation to space.
Panton, Incompressible Flow -- Often used as a graduate level book on theoretical fluid mechanics. Focused mathematical approach. Not an easy read, required some prerequisite knowledge of fluid flow (overview of the fundamentals is very brief), but it's the next logical step up when you're ready to take your fluid work further.
Again, please stop trying to apply your physics 1 understanding of friction to this. The way friction is taught in a course like that is completely inaccurate and flat WRONG with how friction and tires actually work. It would be like trying to newtonian physics in astronomy, where relativity is incredibly important.
Have you ever stopped to think and ask why sports cars have wide tires? According to your sources and the physics 1 modelling of friction, surface area has no factor in lateral force, so why would they ever want to have those big, heavy, wide tires when they could just get nice skinny and light ones which get the same amount of grip? Its because friction is a nightmarishly complicated topic and all of those numbers youre looking at are at best rough ballpark guesstimates dont hold up in reality.
First off, in YOUR OWN SOURCE, there are items in there with higher than 1 coefficient of frictions, so its clear that even the completely basic (and wrong) understanding of friction isnt bounded at 1.
Second, there are a ton of readily available examples of street cars exceeding 1G in acceleration, braking, and cornering. Basically every reasonably quick sports car today has a higher than 1G skidpad, most of which dont generate any downforce, and even the ones that do arent generating anything meaningful at skidpad speeds. Under your assumption it would be literally impossible for the corvette z06 to hit the 1.2G on a skidpad that it did in car and driver's test. The Tesla model S also would not be able to hit its 0-60 time of 2.3 seconds, and it definitely isnt generating downforce. On top of that, basically every car on the market can hit >1 peak braking Gs.
third, "you dont increase the u" is completely wrong. u is an ungodly complicated variable which depends on temperature, chemistry, surface conditions, surface properties, deformation, contact angle, system dynamics, and funny enough the normal force as well. Its why you have to warm up a racing tire, its why race tires use very different rubber compounds and construction methods than street tires, its why racing brakes dont work worth a shit the first few times you try to stop, its why vehicle suspension matters, its why vehicle weight matters in a corner.
Start on page 13 to start learning about how tires and friction actually work then after youve read that book about 10 times go buy race car vehicle dynamics and read that about 5 times. Then go work on a racing team for 5 years, then come back and talk to me about your understanding of friction.
Elementary Principles of Chemical Processes was the book used in my first ChemE major class. It discusses a lot of the big ideas in chem e without getting too specific. You can find the international edition for around 10 dollars online.
Amazon Link
Totally forgot about this test! Hard to believe it was only 3 years ago.
From what I remember, I did the acceleration testing and one of the other test drivers did the handling testing. Essentially the 1LE performed identically on both tires. The figure eight test is so short that the 0.03 avg lat g difference is basically noise.
Much of the reasoning why has to do with optimization of the suspension for a given tire. I won't pretend to be an expert on suspension setup, so I'll point you here: https://www.amazon.com/Race-Car-Vehicle-Dynamics-Experiments/dp/0768011272
This is the best answer. And the reason why the spacecraft computers are 5-10 years behind commercial technology.
Source: SMAD
/u/another_user_name posted this list a while back. Actual aerospace textbooks are towards the bottom but you'll need a working knowledge of the prereqs first.
Non-core/Pre-reqs:
Mathematics:
Calculus.
1-4) Calculus, Stewart -- This is a very common book and I felt it was ok, but there's mixed opinions about it. Try to get a cheap, used copy.
1-4) Calculus, A New Horizon, Anton -- This is highly valued by many people, but I haven't read it.
1-4) Essential Calculus With Applications, Silverman -- Dover book.
More discussion in this reddit thread.
Linear Algebra
3) Linear Algebra and Its Applications,Lay -- I had this one in school. I think it was decent.
3) Linear Algebra, Shilov -- Dover book.
Differential Equations
4) An Introduction to Ordinary Differential Equations, Coddington -- Dover book, highly reviewed on Amazon.
G) Partial Differential Equations, Evans
G) Partial Differential Equations For Scientists and Engineers, Farlow
More discussion here.
Numerical Analysis
5) Numerical Analysis, Burden and Faires
Chemistry:
Physics:
2-4) Physics, Cutnel -- This was highly recommended, but I've not read it.
Programming:
Introductory Programming
Programming is becoming unavoidable as an engineering skill. I think Python is a strong introductory language that's got a lot of uses in industry.
Core Curriculum:
Introduction:
Aerodynamics:
Thermodynamics, Heat transfer and Propulsion:
Flight Mechanics, Stability and Control
5+) Flight Stability and Automatic Control, Nelson
5+)[Performance, Stability, Dynamics, and Control of Airplanes, Second Edition](http://www.amazon.com/Performance-Stability-Dynamics-Airplanes-Education/dp/1563475839/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1315534435&sr=8-1, Pamadi) -- I gather this is better than Nelson
Engineering Mechanics and Structures:
3-4) Engineering Mechanics: Statics and Dynamics, Hibbeler
6-8) Analysis and Design of Flight Vehicle Structures, Bruhn -- A good reference, never really used it as a text.
G) Introduction to the Mechanics of a Continuous Medium, Malvern
G) Fracture Mechanics, Anderson
G) Mechanics of Composite Materials, Jones
Electrical Engineering
Design and Optimization
Space Systems
Shigley's is great for learning how to design and why you design the way you do. It's the book I used in college and still reference at work. I'm not so sure it'd be great for a novice engineer. For a more practical approach, I'd recommend a few below (not necessarily in this order):
A nice free reference manual that includes all sorts of design equations is the NCEES reference handbook. I used it back when I took my FE exam (the first exam you take before you become what's call a "Professional Engineer" in the US). It's a nice PDF to have around, though it doesn't go into a lot of explanation as to what the equations are.
A few web resources I use are: http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/, http://www.roymech.co.uk/
I'm sure I'll think of some more and, if I do, I'll update this post.
Hope that helps.
On top of the recommendation for the PE review book. Grab a copy of Roark's Formulas for Stress and Strain. I think the first edition was written in 1934, and its still in print.
Hundreds of solutions to many types of beams, plates, pressure veseels, and misc other problems. If you are doing much FEA or stress analysis at work, this book is a must.
http://www.amazon.com/Roarks-Formulas-Stress-Strain-8th/dp/0071742476
Coming from a GeoSci background, you may have already used Callister, but if not, it is my most highly recommended textbook. Of all the textbooks. It is simply amazing. If you are beyond that already, the deeper book I would recommend is Meyers and Chawla which is also an amazing book, but much more difficult to get a handle on. Meyers and Chawla is what I learned from at the graduate level in Materials Engineering, and indeed it is quite heavy on the details and equations. That being said, when responding to almost all questions with regards to materials, the first place I look is Callister. The last time I used Meyers and Chawla was looking into the specific mechanisms and modeling methods for creep. If you get and understand M&C you will probably know more theory than anybody else at your knew job.
BMW as recommended previously. The other Bible for spacecraft design is SMAD.
http://www.amazon.com/Mission-Analysis-Design-Technology-Library/dp/1881883108/ref=pd_sim_b_1
I also have that book. I think it's great if you already understand orbits. If you don't, it might be a little too technical. However, to anyone that already has a base in orbits, that is a great book.
Another good one!
Machine Design by Norton
Theory of Machines and Mechanisms by Shigley
are considered the two bibles on machine design and are common in machine design courses.
Materials Selection in Mechanical Design by Ashby
The Machinery's Handbook is a must have and I assume you already know about this.
Mechanisms and Mechanical Designs Sourcebook is good to help spark ideas or solve problems. There are other books along the same lines.
There's information on tolerancing and machining in The Machinery's Handbook especially. I'm not sure on other resources for those. There are books on manufacturing processes that'll discuss the tolerances capable and design limitations.
Here you go.
Here’s a pdf of Fundamentals of Metallurgy by Sheshardi Seetharamen. Helped me a lot while I was in school, especially for chemistry.
The go to book for metallurgy / engineering (and the most recommended here) is Materials Science and Engineering: An Introduction by Callister
Since Le Mans (linked posts only):
Yesterday, Maldonado (not a meme, just silly): http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/jw47n/maldonado_is_worse_than_hitler/
No race for Button: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/jw35u/no_race_for_button/
Copypasta-esque: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/jrc80/dont_get_me_wrong_bruno_is_a_great_driver_but/
Prost vs. Senna panel comic: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/jlimk/prostsenna/
Trollface Button: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/j4ymz/you_went_off_a_lot_didnt_you/
Overtakes 'like a boss' with a mugshot of Kobayashi: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/search?q=like+a+boss&restrict_sr=on&sort=relevance
Copypasta: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/jjayd/three_words_jenson/
Copypasta re Button at Silverstone (presumably): http://i.imgur.com/qBUAp.jpg
http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/?count=275&after=t3_j6b5i
Button eating a biscuit: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/?count=325&after=t3_j4ggc
Vettel overtaking: http://i.imgur.com/jOQ6L.jpg
Vettel overtaking: http://i.imgur.com/4unXN.jpg
That laughing face: http://i.imgur.com/z5mpn.png
Haynes manual for about the 4th or 5th time: http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0857330993
Haynes again: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/iphp4/haynes_red_bull_racing_f1_owners_workshop_manual/
Current points standings (?): http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/illa4/formula_1_drivers_standing/ and http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/ill98/formula_1_teams_standing/ - deservedly downvoted (linking to someone's advert-ridden blog, no doubt)
40 upvotes for pasting Terrence & Phillip heads on marshalls at Canadian GP: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/?count=650&after=t3_ikti3
The Haynes manual appears again: http://www.amazon.com/dp/0857330993/ref=cm_sw_su_dp
Troll face Vettel with 40 upvotes: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/i9jeb/luckily_hes_not_a_fortune_teller/
Haynes manual: http://www.haynes.co.uk/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10001&storeId=10001&productId=52821&langId=-1&parent_category_rn=34566
Button, the 'most interesting F1 driver' copypasta (169 upvotes): http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/hxzv1/the_most_interesting_f1_driver/
Don't know: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/hy0dw/yep_i_still_have_it/
No upvotes, but 'Vettel's a whingey little fucker': http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/hy54a/bbc_race_report_fixed/
'Spoiler': http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/hnum3/spoiler/
Forever alone F1: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/hnve2/forever_1/
Others before Le Mans:
I first started noticing it when Petrov had his infamous 'flying' moment - a .gif with troll faces superimposed (http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/search?q=gif&restrict_sr=on&sort=relevance).
Also, from Monaco, rage comic (264 upvotes): http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/hmum9/monaco_rage/
Another rage: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/dxguc/hey_f1_reddit_sorry_i_know_this_is_several_months/
More rage: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/e6930/abber_dabby_spoiler_rage/
Y U NO meme: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/hmxr1/this_goes_for_both_quali_and_the_race/
http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/h6qp2/hamilton_has_had_enough_of_vettels_finger/
Demotivational poster: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/gngo4/back_to_malaysia_ii/
Petrov flying (plus gif in comments): http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/gmn8y/stoli_gives_you_wings/
EJ copypasta: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/gm9ga/what_i_think_will_happen_tomorrow/
Petrov trollface: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/gji4g/what_most_people_thought_of_petrov/
Rage: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/gbtqk/f1_spoilereverything_went_better_than_expected/
Bernie copypasta: http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/ejytf/badass_bernie/
Granted, this isn't representative of the deluge of memes in other subreddits. But about a year ago, there was very little of this, and I think when they did crop up, they were all the more funny. But I worry that r/formula1 is beginning to turn into the rest of Reddit. I was attracted to Reddit because of good grammar, intelligent comments, insightful posts, and quirky in-jokes. Over the past year that has mostly disappeared, and I have stuck mostly to r/formula1. I just don't want to see one of the few parts of Reddit I can still intelligently enjoy devolving into a Reddit memefest resembling a cross-over between Youtube comments and FunnyJunk.
Beam Equations for how far it will bend, and the formula stress=M*y/I.
Notice both are inversely proportional to the second moment of area (I), which for a circular tube is given by the second equation on this list.
Roark's has a far more complete list of beam scenarios, the seven in that image may not cover your use cases.
Edit: Here's a scan that was lifted from an older edition of Roark's. It should have anything you're looking for.
If you like back roads, you should grab this book.
https://www.amazon.com/Guide-Arizona-Backroads-4-Wheel-Drive-Trails/dp/1934838195/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1520959174&sr=8-1&keywords=arizona+off+road+trails+book
The High Frontier by Gerard O'Neill is the book you're looking for. Its responsible for the O'Neill Cylinder and most of the ideas about space colonies used by Tomino in making Mobile Suit Gundam.
Hey, congrats, you have a budget. The downside though is your budget is pretty small for a world cruiser. You're going to be limited to older boats in the 26-30ft range and even then you may need to save up some to equip some addons like a liferaft, windvane and maybe a SSB radio or something for weather.
A start would be here: http://www.atomvoyages.com/planning/good-old-boats-list.html
You can also start with this book: http://www.amazon.com/Twenty-Small-Sailboats-Take-Anywhere/dp/0939837323
I wouldn't start collecting equipment now. I'd be looking a good solid core boat that you like the layout on that fits your current budget with some money left over. I'd then start cruising more locally on it first and then add the gear you want and need on her for an ocean cruise. Basically shake her down and learn on her with smaller cruises, then work up to bigger ones.
But you want that good solid base of a boat first. Something you can really trust to keep you safe in bad weather and rough seas.
Another option would be to just crew on other people's boats who are cruising the world.
"If engineering were easy, they would have sent a boy with a note."
Seriously there aren't any shortcuts. Either you learn the fundamentals or you don't. But if you want a really good general reference book, get The Mechanical Engineering Reference Manual
Other useful references:
In actual practice, unless we are launching things into space or making them fly through the air, a lot of engineering is just picking thinks that we know will work by experience (if a 1" square tube will work let's use a 2") or by consulting with vendors.
MechE and ChemEs both take Thermo, fluids, heat/mass transfer, process controls, and a lot of the same pre-reqs. What's different is the chemistry courses (so take orgo chem, Physical chemistry especially if you're still at uni), chemical kinetics, Material and energy balances, separations. Kinetics and separations, you should wait until you've got the chem courses done. Material and energy balances...get a copy of Felder and Rousseau (http://www.amazon.com/Elementary-Principles-Chemical-Processes-Richard/dp/047168757X)
An Introduction to Ordinary Differential Equations - $7.62
Ordinary Differential Equations - $14.74
Partial Differential Equations for Scientists and Engineers - $11.01
Dover books on mathematics have great books for very cheap. I personally own the second and third book on this list and I thought they were a great resource, especially for the price.
IMO schematic capture is just not the way to go. The applications of FPGAs are just too big these days for that low-level approach. (I am making a distinction between gate-level schematics and high-level descriptions, where you are describing huge blocks of complexity).
If you are doing small circuits that you would define by gates, you might even be better off doing it with discrete logic chips.
https://www.amazon.com/Learning-Art-Electronics-Hands-Course/dp/0521177235/
For small circuits in HDL, you can use free simulators.
Also I'm not sure what you mean by "older version of the programming language." Older chips sometimes mean you have to use the older development environments but the languages VHDL vs. Verilog or System Verilog is not really about old-vs-new.
https://contextualelectronics.com/ by /u/Chris_Gammell
https://www.edx.org/course/circuits-electronics-1-basic-circuit-mitx-6-002-1x-0
https://www.edx.org/course/circuits-electronics-2-amplification-mitx-6-002-2x-0
https://www.edx.org/course/circuits-electronics-3-applications-mitx-6-002-3x-0
https://www.edx.org/course/embedded-systems-shape-the-world-microcontroller-inputoutput
The Art of Electronics https://smile.amazon.com/dp/0521809266/
Learning the Art of Electronics: A Hands-On Lab Course https://smile.amazon.com/dp/0521177235/
Not my thing, but dude, kudos to you for build finish and worksmanship. I'm really impressed.
You are going to have wheelbase changes as you corner, and the rear is too narrow for the front end. I would have made that rear tire as wide as possible. It will tend oversteer a lot and will be difficult to use the throttle to balance the vehicle. Chassis could use more triangulation too, but from a glance, the tubing looks big enough to hold.
If I can suggest a reading, please check out https://www.amazon.com/Tune-Win-science-development-tuning/dp/0879380713
I'd say to keep remembering that what you're trying to set up is a student run business. Pretend you're Elon Musk trying to tell people how electric is the next best thing in the automotive market, which may be true, but the public (and more importantly, endorsers such as the school) are not going to be swayed easily without proof of concept.
Before I go on, I was the president of the VCU FSAE team in Richmond, VA up until last month (June 2017). The team was in the same predicament as yours 10 years ago, and was getting threatened with the discarding of the half-finished vehicle up every other year until our first competition at Lincoln 2017 (for internal combustion). Richmond is the capital of Virginia, so I'm very familiar with the difficulties of building a vehicle in the city as you've described above. That being said, the information I'm providing is from a team that didn't pass the Noise/Kill-Switch tests at tech inspection, and I'm probably going to be one of the least experienced people to respond to this thread.
Start with looking at the paperwork required for competition, particularly the Business Logic Case. Here, you outline your goals for the vehicle and why you want to build it in the first place and who you will sell it to. Do you want to make the car cheap and market it to a broader, lower income market? Or do you want to make a high cost vehicle which comes with options such as paddle shifting, adjustable front and rear wings, and a carbon fiber monocoque. Every design decision that is made on the car after deciding on your market and budget needs to coincide with the Business Logic Case, which you are allowed to modify if the team decides that they want to market differently for whatever reason. The car should be designed around the Business Logic Case, and we messed up by designing our Business Logic Case around the car, and that's why I want to mention this so strongly.
From there, you'll probably want to assign a few people who have taken their economics/business courses to start on the presentation. There are a lot of things in the presentation that the judges love to see, such as factory layouts, tooling requirements, and labor costs that take a lot of time to prepare and assess accurately.
Design work can start alongside the Presentation, beginning with the chassis. There are a few key points I'd like to throw in first:
So as a summary, compile all the paperwork that you'll require for competition, and begin working on it as soon as you can. It should go something in the starting order of:
With all of this completed, you should be able to make a very solid case to anybody at the school for building space. I encourage you to keep trying to get work space as you put together the virtual stuff in the vehicle however.
I will leave these resources as well for you to look through:
Good luck, and let me know if you have any other questions!
I could go on for hours about basic vehicle dynamics tbh, but suffice it to say that there are countless variables that go into determining handling characteristics. If you're really interested, the definitive introductory resource is this book, which if you can find used would probably be best. It's certainly not an easy read.
For a more accessible read, this book is pretty great too. It's also much cheaper.
IMO, you should probably do a bit more research about common solutions that people have for your particular car. I'd recommend, before changing anything, learning a bit more about basic vehicle dynamics. You don't even need to learn fancy math or anything, just kind of get an idea of what changes generally affect which characteristics.
Marks' Handbook for Engineers - Great specific reference for tolerances and fits, also has good general design "common knowledge", formulas, and practice.
Mark's Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers.
At least it is a good reference whenever you want to remember how to do something, and learn some things you didn't learn in school.
https://www.amazon.com/Marks-Standard-Handbook-Mechanical-Engineers/dp/0071428674
It's Marks' handbook!
http://www.amazon.com/Standard-Handbook-Mechanical-Engineers-Edition/dp/0071428674
Search the right places and you can find non-official digital copies, if you know what I mean...
If you want to buy it, it's edited every ten years, and luckly, next year they will launch the 12th edition.
Roark's Formulas for Stress and Strain is the bible for such questions.
Any materials or mechanics student should own this book forever.
Your confusion is partially due to incorrect definitions of terminology you are using. As spacecampreject mentioned, there are four fundamental forces acting on an aircraft at any given time:
Weight - the downward force due to the aircraft's mass. This force always acts downward towards the center of the earth.
Thrust - the propulsive force due to the aircraft's engines doing what they do. In general, this force is aligned with the longitudinal axis of the aircraft, but some airplanes have their engines mounted at a slight angle for design reasons. Other airplanes (fighter jets) with thrust-vectoring capabilities can change the thrust axis slightly during flight, and many jets use some form of reverse thrust to assist in bringing the aircraft to a stop on the runway. But when the plane is flying normally, thrust pushes you forward and its direction is generally fixed with respect to the aircraft.
Lift - the component of the overall aerodynamic force that is perpendicular to the free-stream velocity vector (see below).
Drag - the component of the overall aerodynamic force that is parallel to the free-stream velocity vector (see below).
When an aircraft moves through the air, a overall aerodynamic force (sometimes called the resultant aerodynamic force) is created from the various pressure and friction forces imposed on the body. For engineering/math purposes, we separate this force into two perpendicular forces: lift and drag, defined in relation to the free-stream velocity vector. The free-stream velocity vector is the vector opposite the path of travel of the aircraft (sometimes referred to as the "relative wind"). (Here is a good force diagram)
In normal forward flight, lift is nearly parallel and opposite to weight, and thrust is nearly parallel and opposite to drag. If you were to point your airplane's nose straight up in an attempt to fly vertically, then with a purely vertical velocity, lift is now acting horizontally (not helping to keep the plane in the air) and the airplane's thrust must overcome the combined forces of drag and weight pulling the plane towards the earth.
To achieve/sustain vertical flight, an airplane needs a thrust-to-weight ratio greater than 1.0. Some fighter jets can do this. Many RC planes can. Most private and commercial airplanes cannot (a common ballpark thrust-to-weight ratio is about 0.3).
References: M.S. in Aerospace Engineering; if you want a great introductory textbook, I highly recommend Introduction to Flight by John D. Anderson, Jr. I own the 6th edition, I believe the 7th edition is current.
We use this book heavily at my school (undergrad). I've also heard it's pretty much a standard around the US
http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Flight-John-Anderson/dp/0073380245
While it looks kind of scary by its size and thickness I like The Art of Electronics (https://www.amazon.ca/Art-Electronics-Paul-Horowitz/dp/0521809266/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1524591686&sr=8-1&keywords=the+art+of+electronics&dpID=51oDPY4SbfL&preST=_SX198_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch) with its lab companion volume (https://www.amazon.ca/Learning-Art-Electronics-Hands-Course/dp/0521177235/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1524591686&sr=8-2&keywords=the+art+of+electronics&dpID=51DvCTSt%252BeL&preST=_SX198_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch).
I also highly recommend Learning the Art of Electronics student manual as well, if you're still getting into electronics.
In my experience, I consult this book just as much as AoE.
http://www.amazon.com/Red-Bull-Racing-Car-Championship-Winning/dp/0857330993/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1463044349&sr=8-2&keywords=haynes+rb6
You can see the pictures there on what to expect of the book.
(Or just search a site in your country that sells books)
If you're really interested in it, a good book to read is Tune To Win by Carroll Smith. It was written in the 70's so it's a bit dated but still plenty relevant, especially to new drivers/engineers. But if you're studying finance you probably already have more than enough on your plate.
Basically, driving a race car is about managing weight transfer to balance the car around each corner. The more load one corner or end of the car has on it the more grip it has. The driver controls lateral load transfer with the steering wheel and longitudinal load transfer with the gas and brake pedals.
Tuning the suspension is another way to influence how load is directed around the car. For example, if the front springs are very stiff, the front of the car won't squat as low under braking, less weight is transferred forward so the rear of the car has more grip. So that's why if you're struggling with turn-in understeer you might want to soften either the front sprigs or front (low-speed) compression damping. Alternatively you could also soften the rear low-speed rebound damping (take not that when talking about dampers, speed doesn't refer to speed of the car, but of the piston traveling through the fluid in the damper. Think high speed=bumps, low speed=weight transfer).
Anti-roll bars are a bit different since they manage lateral load. They also link suspension systems together, so if you hit a kerb or a bump with the right front wheel, the left front will feel it as well. Very generally, softer=more grip. The book I referenced goes into a lot more detail than I can, but I like to think of it as making that end of the car more malleable. Although I don't think that's entirely technically accurate. It also may be worth noting that when tuning the car, anti-roll bars are the first thing real-world teams play with, and a lot of cars have anti-roll bars adjustable from the cockpit. The team uses it as a sort of guide to lead other larger setup changes.
To your second question, the car can behave differently in different parts of the corner. It might feel great when you turn in (usually at which point the car is slowing-meaning forward weight transfer), but then lose all front grip when you're accelerating out of the corner. This means that you're transferring too much weight to the rear under power, so the solution is to stiffen rear springs or low-speed damper compression. If it happens earlier in the corner, when there is more lateral load, then stiffening the rear anti-roll bar (or the opposite, softening the front) might be a better solution.
This isn't even getting into things like camber/castor/toe, which I don't really understand enough myself. The general rule of thumb is to try to keep the outer/middle/inner tire temps as even as possible.
I think it's also common opinion that cars should always have at least a little bit of toe-in.Edit: This video has a good overview.Your third point is absolutely correct. Race car setup is an unsolvable equation. There are too many interdependent variables for there to ever be an ultimate solution. Add on top of that different driving styles and one setup might work well for one driver and be trash for another. It's more of an art than a precise science.
I hope that helps!
Race Car Vehicle Dynamics (Milliken)
Tune to Win
Good Luck!
I live in AZ and I bought the guide to Arizona backroads book and it gives you info on over a 100 trails and where to find them.
Book
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porkchop_plot
​
Find one of these for the earth-moon system, if you haven't already.
​
Did your prof say how much they weigh delta-v vs time of flight? Knowing how they are going to grade is probably better for making a cost function than assuming how much consumables/fuel you need.
​
There is this, I have no idea how helpful it will be: https://www.nasa.gov/offices/ocfo/nasa-cost-estimating-handbook-ceh
​
A copy of SMAD may be available at your local uni library: https://www.amazon.com/Mission-Analysis-Design-Technology-Library/dp/1881883108
​
Barring that, you could assume a rate for consumption of well, consumables (food, air, etc) and use that to find a mass budget for that. You can then assuming a launch cost per lb. Do something similar for your propulsion system, but assuming an engine with a certain ISP/propellant.
SMAD.
https://www.amazon.com/Mission-Analysis-Design-Technology-Library/dp/1881883108/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1535934282&sr=8-3&keywords=smad
>My challenge or I suppose my question would be what material I would use to manufacture something like that (like once I have a mold).
Material must be selected before the tool is made because the material properties drive the tool design (shrinkage rates, viscosity etc).
There are thousands of options for injection mouldable plastics so you'll need some requirements to narrow down your options.
Plastic Part Design for Injection Molding: An Introduction By Robert Malloy is a great intro to IM part design.
Check second hand book sites for cheaper used copies (Abebooks.com is good).
There are free design guide pdfs online (of varying quality...) which give a decent intro but are usually tens of pages so obviously don't have the detail a decent books will. The guides by Bayer and Dupont are the best imo.
Nice! To help your problem along, I'm pretty sure this is the AZ 4x4 bible. Might be worth ordering or at least checking out from a library.
Best to start with the Ur-book: O'Neill's "The High Frontier" https://www.amazon.com/High-Frontier-Human-Colonies-Apogee/dp/189652267X
For plastic injection molding, this book was a good start for me. The issue is, you can take a feature (e.g. snaps) and write volumes on design and application - don't take one book/source to be the only reference.
The various resin suppliers also publish DFM literature that can be useful and worth reading.
Dupont Assembly Techniques -- more articles here
BASF on snaps -- more from BASF
And, as silly as it is... Occasionally protomold will publish a useful nugget of practical information.
I've included Amazon links as I could find them. The three reference guides I have are:
I also think reference books for the FE and PE exams would be helpful.
Well lets see. This year:
When did you last contribute anything sensible to anything?
The concepts of nucleation and growth are covered in most introductory materials science textbooks. Callister covers this topic at an introductory level in chapter 10 of his book.
If you want to delve deeper, you should look for books on solid-solid or liquid-solid phase transformations and/or kinetics. I can give recommendations if you are interested.
Hardenability is also an important concept to understand for anyone working in the steel industry or designing things made out of steel. I would expect most companies in this field to have some sort of on the job training, or at least the contact info for someone at their heat treatment supplier who knows what they are talking about.
Answer key:
(a) 8/3, assuming no momentum loss to the air.
(b) 64/9, treating the stings as massless ridged rods.
This is nowhere near as bad as physics problems get. You want to see tough look at this book.
This doesn't answer your question, but for some classes, there are very standard texts. It's anecdotal, but every single recent physics graduate student I've met used Jackson for electricity and magnetism (http://www.amazon.com/Classical-Electrodynamics-Third-Edition-Jackson/dp/047130932X). There are other texts out there I'm sure, but Jackson is by far the most common.
There are incompetent physicists, and there are incompetents who call themselves physicists. This response which says "experimental data is not to be debated" is representative of a field not just in crisis but about to experience an extinction event due to the truth of classical physics. If you want to really understand the depth of the problem in modern physics -- the fracture of reality and experiment - lots of math, little reason - read this essay.
Loud public pronouncements that show you don't understand something GUISED as a debate is DAMAGING. These posts are best to be ignored but I have encountered physicists who do google searches and come across people like "CSurveyGuy. " They actually seize his lampoon logic as justification that the hydrino is not worth a look.
There are all levels of people in every field - medical school grads, practiced family doctors, and neurosurgeons - a "doctor" is meaningless as to whether you can be taken seriously. Saying "I'm a physicist" is meaningless. Let's help clarify the prereqs to Mills.
- You need Jackson textbook level E&M to tackle Mills. This is graduate level E&M and many quantum physicists aren't up to speed on it. Since the electron is electromagnetic you need advanced E&M. If you don't have it, go back to school.
- You need strong intuitive capacity. Surprise, surprise, most physicists can't "see" new architectures very well. Brett Holverstott has done a masterful job read hi book for a start. Remember, special relativity was first published in 1905 (interestingly the year the Wright brothers first flew continously and only 10 years early Lord Kelvin physicist of the day said "flight of heavier than air objects is impossible."). Einstein's work was not "seen" nor accepted by ACTUAL elite physicists (not CSurveyGuys heckling in the town square). Proof? In 1931, "100 Authors Against Einstein" is published ( https://archive.org/details/HundertAutorenGegenEinstein ).
- You need to work very hard. Mills flat out has the most powerful intuition we've probably seen for nature in a long time. He "sees" things as obvious that aren't because he imagines nature. He designed the electron architecture - literally imagined reality - and then proved it works - the electron has spin etc. The electron solution is probably the Taj Mahal of science, if you will.
​
Many physicists are plug and chug quantum physicists who use the theory to crank out some marginal results. They don't have any vested in the truth, and may believe we cannot even find the truth about physical reality (it's unknowable to them - the uncertainty principle).
"CSurveyGuy" (and the bucket of similar internet dwellers) may want to actually solve something using this new theory - rather than flailing in public his lack of understanding. Statements like "big, horrible problems, like violating known rules of math" means this person is likely a time-waster. Reddit is not the place to do science.
If anyone is interested in an actual real debate on the theory - read "Reconsidering the validation of multi-electron standard quantitative quantum mechanics" by Dr, Jonathan Phillips (he is on the Navy's Energy Academic Group and his resume speaks for itself). Which is an all out attack on quantum mechanics that it isn't even a valid theory, as it is a jumble of theories none of which validate against experimental data. You can't read the abstract, you have to actually read the details. In that paper, near the end he says that CQM (Classical QM- i.e. Mills theory) DOES appear to be a valid theory since it matches energy levels of electrons and distinguishes them, and matches the experimental data that is the focus of the paper.
Addressing a smattering of other points
- Dr. Randy Booker was chair of UNC's physics department. The UNC chemist there Dr. Rick Maas said the "experimental data is so convincing it is time to stop the bickering about the theory". See the BBC Focus Article "Water Power" from 2005.
- 3 body problems go away because of the architecture of the atomic electrons
- Rathke was fully discredited by Mills who showed Rathke made mathematical errors that nullified all arguments. Since it has been 14 years since this all occurred the case is closed. Rathke was an ant who got crushed by a giant. The almost comedic part of this is that even Nobel laureates - who I have contacted - said they "haven't had time to look into the experimental evidence." A total revolution in science, but "my dog at the homework" type responses.
Since these back and forths won't end. It is best to disengage from internet "physicists" unless they talk about facts, not histrionic claims guised as "debate". I am sure if you took a Family Physician from the 1800s and brought him here today to talk about cloning sheep - he would flatly deny it is possible, and would rail against the theory, and would be an emotional mess because the world has changed. Physics was ripe for disruption - everyone admits that - and now we all play catchup.
You haven't really looked at all have you?
Art of the Formula 1 Race Car
http://amzn.com/0760337314
McLaren M23: 1973 onwards (all marks) (Owners' Workshop Manual)
http://amzn.com/0857333127
Lotus 72 Manual: An Insight Into Owning, Racing and Maintaining Lotus's Legendary Formula 1 Car (Owners' Workshop Manual)
http://amzn.com/0857331272
Red Bull Racing F 1 Car: An Insight into the Technology, Engineering, Maintenance and Operation of the World Championship-winning Red Bull Racing RB6 (Owners' Workshop Manual)
http://amzn.com/0857330993
The Golden Age of Formula 1
http://amzn.com/3832794360
Formula 1 in Camera 1950-59
http://amzn.com/1844255530
Formula 1 in Camera 1960-69
http://amzn.com/1844252183
Formula 1: The Roaring 70s (English, German, French, Spanish and Italian Edition)
http://amzn.com/3832795375
Formula 1 in Camera 1970-79
http://amzn.com/1859609600
Formula 1 in Camera 1970-79: Volume Two
http://amzn.com/0857330748
Formula 1 in Camera 1980-89
http://amzn.com/1844251098
A mark's handbook will probably get you started --
http://www.amazon.com/Standard-Handbook-Mechanical-Engineers-Edition/dp/0071428674/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1398184423&sr=8-1&keywords=mark%27s+handbook
This what I’m hoping for Christmas if you want to get me it that’ll be great!
Marks standard handbook for mechanical engineers
Mark's Standard Handbook is basically every MechE textbook crammed into 1. It is pretty expensive, but a PDF can be found with some googling.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0071428674/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1418950920&sr=8-1&dpPl=1&dpID=51X0PIIJgKL&ref=plSrch&pi=AC_SY200_QL40
Big fan of this one
http://www.amazon.com/Practical-Electronics-Inventors-Paul-Scherz/dp/0071452818
Get yourself a student edition of some Autodesk products - AutoCad and Inventor at the least - to practice CAD and drafting skills.
Some books about Mech Eng specifically:
http://www.amazon.com/Mechanisms-Mechanical-Devices-Sourcebook-Edition/dp/0071704426
http://www.amazon.com/Basic-Machines-How-They-Work/dp/0486217094
http://www.amazon.com/Engineering-Formulas-Kurt-Gieck/dp/0071457747
http://www.amazon.com/507-Mechanical-Movements-Mechanisms-Devices/dp/0486443604
http://www.amazon.com/Mechanical-Engineering-Principles-John-Bird/dp/0415517850
Don't forget about basic electricity, electronics, hydraulics and pneumatics too.
Get some hands-on experience with machine tools such as lathes and mills. Learn how to program CNC machines using G-code. Try to land a summer job at a factory or assembly plant for the experience. Learn how to make metal castings by watching some YouTube videos and visiting a local foundry.
Find some local ASME members to network with and seek a mentor. ASME also offers a limited free membership to college freshmen.
Mechanical engineer, here. There is no substitute for actually building something, which it seems you're already doing. Outside of coursework and training, I would recommend the following resources:
FUNdaMENTALS of Design: You can download the PDF here. Tons of pictures and equations. This was the "course book" I used in undergrad @ MIT, and you can get it for free! Not really organized, per se, but one cool thing about it is that it's meant to be flipped through and printed double-sided. One side is always a birds-eye or holistic view, and the opposite side is always an in-depth and theoretical treatment of the topics. This is a great way to find out, "Wow! This exists, and here's what it's called!"
Mechanical Engineering Design: This is a pretty good primer on mechanical "stuff."
Mechanisms and Mechanical Devices Sourcebook: This is a great resource to keep handy. I look at this ALL the time, especially when I hit brick walls and need inspiration or fresh ideas.
Misumi: Pretty good place to get industrial-grade mechanical components... not sure about the prices for hobby-level stuff. They also have some good literature and tutorials here.
Hope it helps, and feel free to PM me if you have any questions.
Edit: primary != primer
I have this book and I love it
https://www.amazon.com/Mechanisms-Mechanical-Devices-Sourcebook-5th/dp/0071704426/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1542986124&sr=8-1&keywords=mechanisms
I second Bruhn, also going to throw Roark's out there.
great read for anyone interested in the aerospace field.
get this book https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Flight-John-Anderson/dp/0073380245
All the land is under the thumb of one government or another, so simply purchasing land will do you no good. The one possible exception is Somalia, but then you'll be just another warlord, and the guys already there have more practice than you. You'll need to create new land.
Start by donating to focusfusion.org. If it works out (and things are looking good so far) then in five years we have commercial small-scale non-radioactive fusion reactors producing power at 1/50 the price of coal. As a backup, invest in polywell fusion, which will be a bit slower to develop but still good. From there you can take two routes:
For an even more speculative project, fund experiments on the Woodward Effect, which, if Einstein and Mach were right, could reduce launch costs to almost nothing and get us to Mars in a couple days, and Saturn in a week.
Since you're proposing a massive land purchase, perhaps you have massive funds to do this sort of thing. You could get your libertarian nation without hassling with legacy governments, and incidentally, save the world.
If you don't have the massive funds yourself, start a foundation and get a big group of people together to do it.
The Millennial Project: Eight Easy Steps to Colonizing the Galaxy
After reading the sample and some of the reviews, I went ahead and made a purchase. I also bought 'Pale Blue Dot' from the same author.
Would you recommend Space Chronicles: Facing the Final Frontier by Neil deGrasse Tyson?
Neil Degrasse Tyson addresses #8 (#10?) in his book Space Chronicles: Facing the Ultimate Frontier. He makes the point that truly cutting-edge exploration and the necessary technological advances it requires is far too risky of an enterprise to make it a sound business investment. However, those same advances go on to benefit private industry and society as a whole.
Edit: The second #8... Probably should be #10.
http://www.amazon.com/Materials-Science-Engineering-An-Introduction/dp/0470419970
If you pm me I can give you a pdf copy of the older version.
Here's a good primer to the physics of the neural nets you'll be encountering in the wiring as well; required if you're going to be doing some logic-level debugging (which is pretty much all the time if you want to go beyond the usual Swedish teutonic - which is why you're here, right?)
There are ChemEs who work in beautiful locations (LA, SF, etc.) and there are ChemEs who work in bad locations (Midland, Maxbass, etc.)
 
I don't agree that ChemE is a dying degree nor are you limited to working in dirty industries in remote location (I have experienced both sides).
 
To the OP: Take an introductory chemical engineering class to get a feel for it.
 
Most introductory classes use this textbook.
 
https://www.amazon.com/Elementary-Principles-Chemical-Processes-Richard/dp/047168757X
The book I'd recommend is the textbook that most intro ChemE courses use: Elementary Principles of Chemical Processes, by Felder.
It's not too heavy on prerequisites (mostly just algebra, general chemistry). The problems you'll solve in the text are good examples of the type of thinking that ChEs use, and the author does a good job of explaining things. Also, some anecdotes from time to time.
Not sure if that's what you're looking for, but I can't really think of many non-textbook type examples for the same reason chemical engineers don't show up in films: it's not "Hollywood sexy."
I have two recommendations:
http://www.amazon.com/Differential-Equations-Scientists-Engineers-Mathematics/dp/048667620X/
This is an excellent survey that saved my bacon as a physics BS student transitioning to graduate PDE in math. The text is clear and divided into easily consumable lectures. It's also available for $10, a bargain.
http://www.amazon.com/Partial-Differential-Equations-Action-Universitext/dp/8847007518
This is the book I would recommend as a "second pass" through PDE. If you pursue the subject as a graduate student, this will give you information necessary as you transition to applying real analysis and basic functional analysis ideas to solving PDEs. It has a very holistic approach, but uses a lot of ideas and tools that I didn't see until graduate school. It's a great self-study (but definitely higher level than Farlow), and would be an excellent book to convince your graduate level PDE teacher to give a two semester course from(assuming they were of a more cooperative disposition).
Just get yourself a copy of this and celebrate with beer.
As another option, a relatively easy-to-read book is Farlow's book on PDEs for Scientists and Engineers. It breaks up a bunch of PDE topics (everything from the Heat Equation to perturbation methods) into short lessons using a relatively informal, non-rigorous approach. I'd highly recommend it for beginners and for those who'd like a quick overview of the applications of PDEs to areas in Physics/Engineering.
These aren't websites, but The Art of Electronics and its companion Learning the Art of Electronics are often referred to as learning resources, for good reason.
​
There are of course web sites that teach you electronics, but not on the level these two books, imho. If you don't want to buy books, then I'd recommend you to go watch bigclivedotcom and EEVblog, they have some great content. There are lots of other YT channels with similar content.
Also look for the student lab manual that accompanies the 3rd edition of AoE. This book makes AoE much more approachable. Be sure it's the 2016 edition.
http://www.amazon.com/Race-Car-Vehicle-Dynamics-Experiments/dp/0768011272
http://www.amazon.com/Racing-Chassis-Suspension-Design-PT-90/dp/0768011205
Can't learn suspension design without chassis design!
Here are the two best intro books on the subject:
https://www.amazon.com/Race-Car-Vehicle-Dynamics-Experiments/dp/0768011272
https://www.amazon.com/Fundamentals-Vehicle-Dynamics-Premiere-Books/dp/1560911999
Formula SAE in college is a great resource. Look for a co-op opportunity in vehicle design (it'll probably have to be in Michigan unless you're lucky or go into commercial truck). Experience is highly valued when you're trying to get that intro level job because co-ops and internships are so widely available in the industry.
This question has been asked a bunch of times, but the one post I've found the most helpful was /u/that_video_art_guy's response in this post. For quick reference, here's the copy/paste:
I've read many of these books, I'm partial to the mechanics and team member books but find all of them to be very enjoyable.
The Super Collective Super list of Super Good F1 Books:
Mechanics/Team Members
[Life in the Pit Lane: Mechanic's Story of the Benetton Grand Prix Year](
http://www.amazon.com/Life-Pit-Lane-Mechanics-Benetton/dp/0760300267/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1356716346&sr=1-5&keywords=steve+matchett) - Steve Matchett
[The Mechanic's Tale: Life in the Pit-Lanes of Formula One](
http://www.amazon.com/Mechanics-Tale-Life-Pit-Lanes-Formula/dp/0752827839/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1356716346&sr=1-1&keywords=steve+matchett) - Steve Matchett
The Chariot Makers: Assembling the Perfect Formula 1 Car - Steve Matchett
Team Lotus: My View From the Pitwall - Peter Warr
Jo Ramirez: Memoirs of a Racing Man - Jo Ramirez
Art of War - Five Years in Formula One - Max Mosley, Adam Parr, Paul Tinker
Tales from the Toolbox: A Collection of Behind-the-Scenes Tales from Grand Prix Mechanics - Michael Oliver, Jackie Stewart
Technical Books
Red Bull Racing F1 Car: Haynes Owners' Workshop Manual
McLaren M23: 1973 Haynes Owners' Workshop Manual
Lotus 72: 1970 Haynes Owners' Workshop Manual
Tune to Win: The art and science of race car development and tuning - Carroll Smith
Engineer to Win - Carroll Smith
Nuts, Bolts, Fasteners and Plumbing Handbook AKA: Screw to Win - Carroll Smith
Race Car Vehicle Dynamics: Problems, Answers and Experiments - Doug Milliken
Chassis Design: Principles and Analysis - William F. Milliken, Douglas L. Milliken, Maurice Olley
The Racing & High-Performance Tire: Using Tires to Tune for Grip & Balance - Paul Haney
Technical Driving
Ultimate Speed Secrets: The Complete Guide to High-Performance and Race Driving - Ross Bentley
Going Faster! Mastering the Art of Race Driving - Carl Lopez
Working the Wheel - Martin Brundle
Drivers and Rivalry's
Senna Versus Prost: The Story of the Most Deadly Rivalry in Formula One - Malcolm Folley
The Limit: Life and Death on the 1961 Grand Prix Circuit - Michael Cannell
Winning Is Not Enough: The Autobiography - Sir Jackie Stewart
Shunt: The Story of James Hunt - Tom Rubython
Alex Zanardi: My Sweetest Victory: A Memoir of Racing Success, Adversity, and Courage - Alex Zanardi, Gianluca Gasparini, Mario Andretti.
It Is What It Is: The Autobiography - David Coulthard
Flat Out, Flat Broke: Formula 1 the Hard Way! - Perry McCarthy The Black Stig, Damon Hill
F1 Through the Eyes of Damon Hill: Inside the World of Formula 1 - Damon Hill, Photography: Sutton Images
People Of F1
Life at the Limit: Triumph and Tragedy in Formula One - Professor Sid Watkins
Beyond the Limit - Professor Sid Watkins
I Just Made The Tea: Tales from 30 years inside Formula 1 - Di Spires
Bernie: The Biography of Bernie Ecclestone - Susan Watkins
Picture Books
McLaren The Cars: Updated 2011 Edition
Art of the Formula 1 Race Car - Stuart Codling, James Mann, Peter Windsor, Gordon Murray
If you're not opposed to reading, this is a fantastic book on the subject of suspension and aero tuning
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0879380713/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_Ra-Dyb063XJNZ
DrivingFast.net
TurnFast.com
"The Six Most Important Things You'll Learn At Racing School" (Jalopnik.com article)
"Performance Driving Illustrated" by Ross Bentley (PDF e-book)
"Ultimate Speed Secrets: The Complete Guide to High-Performance and Race Driving" by Ross Bentley (book)
"RaceLogic Advanced Circuit Driving Techniques" (PDF e-book)
Rapid-Racer.com Suspension Tuning
"Tune to Win" by Carroll Smith (book)
I'm quite seriously considering a sailing wander about early retirement/escape. I recommend r/sailing. There are some experienced sailors there, and sometimes the discussion addresses cruising. I'd also recommend The Coastal Cruiser: A complete guide to the design, selection, purchase, and outfitting of auxiliary sailboats under 30 feet--with a portfolio of successful designs , . Twenty Small Sailboats to Take You Anywhere , and Chapman Piloting & Seamanship 66th Edition
The report card you're referring to says we should invest more in our infrastructure - it has nothing to do with our knowledge of how to build bridges or more complex structures. That is a matter of funding over technical ability. Yes, I do think we can build complex structures in space. Because we wouldn't have to deal with gravity, in many ways it would actually be easier. This is not a theory in the slightest.
You should read about Lewis One, Kalpana One, and the books The High Frontier and 2081, as well as Gerard O'Neill's Physics Today article - that last goes into a lot of math on how we would build one, and building one was technically possible even then. Our engineering ability is not the question - our political will and funding is.
First, let's rephrase your statement 'SpaceX showed significant cost savings during Falcon 9 development, compared to traditionally procured launchers' The distinction is important, especially since you don't have insight into SpaceX's accounts to back up that claim, but rather tertiary sources through the GAO.
Secondly, developing launchers and developing spacecraft art nothing alike. I'm almost a full stack launch vehicle engineer. I'd be so far out of my depth on a spacecraft development campaign, it'd be funny. SpaceX was able to develop Falcon 9 for so cheap because:
Planetary science missions (especially to Europa):
​
You ignored the precedent of ISI's Beresheet lander, and my indictment of your ad revenue model. Please read SMAD before commenting again.
Although it's not a course but I recommend picking up this book, Plastics Part Design for Injection Molding by Robert A. Malloy. Professor Malloy recently retired but he was the head of the Plastics Engineering at University of Massachusetts Lowell. The book is really great for design engineers like yourself. Buy it and you will not regret it.
https://www.amazon.com/Plastic-Part-Design-Injection-Molding/dp/1569904367/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8
You need physics, not math. I would suggest to borrow/buy a general mechanics book (Alonso-Finn, Tipler, etc.) and read some if you are serios writing about Hard SF. Then there are specific books about artificial stations/worlds; like this classic “The High Frontier: Human Colonies in Space”. Also, you need to take into account the Coriolis force if your station is too large. This wikipedia article is a good start.
As for the answer you were looking for: the acceleration is [angular velocity]^2 [radius], thus your problem is not exactly the radius but also the angular velocity. As you need a particular period of 34 hours the angular velocity is fixed to 2pi/(34 60 60) = [angular velocity]. Finally, you can find your radius from [your gravity]/[angular velocity]^2.
http://www.amazon.com/The-High-Frontier-Colonies-Apogee/dp/189652267X
The Elysium habitat is about 2 miles big. It is not possible to construct such a Standford torus habitat by exporting materials from Earth surface - the launch of this amount of material would have deleterious effects on the planetary atmosphere - exporting that much material burns off A LOT OF energy, assuming any permutation of current propulsion types.
The only way to construct these kinds of habitats would be by means of mining the moon and NEA asteroids. The time to implement these kinds of industrial infrastructures is (if we invest maximum effort as a planetary society) would be about 20-30 years, and after that we would be able to construct small "Island One" habitats, which are much smaller than these Stanford Torus rings.
Essentially, it would be possible to construct an ever increasing number of these space habitats the moment you have the first. That implies that the number of habitats you can construct would follow an exponential rate. Let's assume it would be possible to erect the first (small) habitat 50 years after humanity goes full force space industrialization. Ten years later we'd have a small habitat. Twenty years we'd have three of these habitats. Thirty years later we would have something like six. Forty years later we could easily have over ten. Then 20, 40, 100, 200, 400. Essentially by 2150 we should have not a single such habitat, but thousands.
Each with a few thousand people living on them.
There is enough asteroid material in the solar system to replicate several thousand earth surfaces from these asteroids. Following the above exponential growth curve it follows that by 2250 most humans would or could be living in space under conditions substantially better than the ones depicted in te movie Elysium.
Even better, the ability to produce energy by SBPS would follow the same trajectory.
http://www.scoop.it/t/space-versus-oil
This is all science fact. Nothing I have said is impossible with todays technologies'. In fact it was well possible with 1970s's technology and these designs were presented to the US senate in the mid 1970s.
But then something happened and some people in charge decided this was not the way they wanted humanity to develop.
I'm probably a bit late here, but I had a spell for six months or so (more than a decade ago), when I was rather distracted by reading (putatively non-fiction) books about space colonization. So here's my late-night ranting summary of this research (links to some key references at the end of this post):
A strong argument can be made that the short- and long-term goals of colonizing space should NOT be to colonize other planets, but in between.
In the "short" term, this could help people on Earth solve certain specific resource scarcity problems (particularly with rare metals and energy production), but colonizing space (or other planets) is NOT a general solution to Earth's overpopulation, pollution, war/conflict, famine, disease, etc. The fuel costs of getting off the Earth are just too outrageous to ever lift a significant fraction of people into space. If anything, the probable isolation of space colonies (planetary or otherwise) could easily create all sorts of issues by themselves. Long-term, this would just be about expansion, spreading life out across the solar system for reasons already in this thread.
If you, erm, dig into the space colonization literature, a lot of the most compelling things have to do with building very large orbital space colonies that spin to simulate gravity, and then recovering natural resources from space, mostly solar power and mining asteroids to sustain and grow colonies and provide attractive merchandise to the Earth.
The classics of the genre (which is much larger than I expected) were written around the time of the space race and focused on bootstrapping self-sustaining orbital colonies, and importantly were built around technology and principles from that time period, not requiring huge leaps in technology (or remotely reasonable computing power). So now these things would (in principle) be more feasible today than, say, the 1970s. The basic notion is that it is far too expensive (and kind of pointless) to focus on colonizing planets. We would basically increase our costs massively, since we would constantly have to climb out of massive
gravity wells. So we should just live in space itself. This isn't saying that we couldn't settle worlds, but that would be a side-show to the main event.
The initial costs are outrageous (though not compared to colonizing Mars), and I personally have a hard time justifying any of it, when we have a hard time dealing with some basic-ass shit just in the US much less the world, but given some disposable income and solidarity, the people of Earth could do it. Should we? In my mind, outside Earth orbit, I'd focus on using robots, until we get our shit together (perhaps helped by robots bring from space the feedstocks for clean fusion plants).
The bootstrapping comes from mining and extremely excellent solar power (which are both much better in orbit than on a planet). The original idea of beaming energy to Earth via microwave radiation is perhaps a bit hare-brained, but maybe not completely. However, asteroid mining could be extremely lucrative, given self-sustaining orbital bases of operation. Mining on Mars or other non-Earth planets is absolutely NOT profitable in most cases, because the cost of lifting material into orbit would kill the margins. Space elevators are a possible futuristic thing for Mars, certainly compared to Earth (though see potential Mars-wide catastrophes a la Kim Stanley Robinson Mars trilogy).
The massive exception to planet-based mining is Helium-3. Helium-3 is extremely scarce on Earth, and mostly obtained as a byproduct of nuclear weapons manufacturing. But large amounts of the stuff could feed clean fusion plants (i.e. not producing radioactive waste). The bootstrap here is a bit destructive, since it involves strip mining the Moon (no elevator needed to save fuel during off-Moon transport, just a big rail gun). But it would be much better to dip robots into the gas giants to filter helium for helium-3 for this potentially outrageously lucrative source of income that could lead to a post energy scarcity world.
Many of the intensely researched books in this area are a bit needlessly provincial in their world view, offering a sort-of space suburbanite 1950's White Americana feel, but they are written by some serious scientists/engineers, and I think they have a lot to offer in the vein OP is seeking. An oddity that might define the genre is that they probably legitimately qualify as non-fiction, but frequently use the future tense, which is, well, unusual, and most of them kind of go off-the-rails at some point. Nevertheless, there are some pretty serious ideas in these classics and their ilk about how this could be done in a way that is really Earth-centered at the outset, where the whole point is to find a new untapped resource to exploit.
Okay, so as not to lose track of OP's main question, I'll stop.
Core reading list:
The original classic is Arthur C. Clarke's The Promise of Space, published in 1968. This sets the stage for the idea that terraforming is not the main event and the man that proposed the geosynchronous orbit covers some serious ground.
The CLASSIC classic is Gerard K. O'neill's The High Frontier, published in 1977. This is essential reading for the space colonization aficionado and forms the foundation of the "non-fiction" genre around the subject.
The mining classic w is Mining the Sky by John S. Lewis, published in 1997. This really lays out the mining thing, especially with respect to the shittiness of big gravity wells and how abundant supplies of helium-3 could be transformative.
I'll quit. There's so many more possible references that explore very proximate things, like how to insure rocket launches and way more far-out stuff, like how to minimize inbreeding on generation ships, but I think if I were to pick three things to read, those are them.
EDITS: for some typos and grammar that I saw.
I don't have a specific recommendation, but I like to do the same thing and I've been using these two books to find good places to explore:
Both provide routes with descriptions, photos, waypoints and turn by turn callouts. Each trail has difficulty rating and in the case of the second book, there is also a remoteness rating. We typically pick a route, follow the waypoints as described in the book the first time to learn the area, and then when we go back we explore side trails and such.
The first book has a lot of the more well known routes all are day-trip length, the second book has much more routes and much more detail. trips in that book range from a few hours to a few days long. Each trail on those books typically includes one or more pretty interesting things to see or do, we haven't been let down yet.
If you don't have one yet, get a state land trust permit, many of the backroads and trails go on state trust land, so if a ranger finds you out there without your permit, you can get fined. It's only $15/20 per year and you can do it all online (for an extra $1) by going here: https://land.az.gov/recreational-permit-portal
I lied: If you've read down this far, here's a specific location that is pretty neat: There's an old gin house at the end of the trail that leads to Little Fish Canyon. That should be enough to get you to find it on google maps. satellite view might show you the structure a bit. The building is fenced in to keep the animals out, you can undo the fence on the north side to get through, just make sure to connect it back up when you are done. You can open window covers to peek in and get a better look, but make sure you close it all back up when you are done. do NOT enter the building, that might get you in trouble. All around those trails are a number of mines as well. most (all?) are sealed with gates to protect the bats, but still kind cool to look in.
If you are on Facebook, search for "Tucson Jeeps" group and join it. People there are organizing runs all the time. Some of the trails are difficult and/or remote enough that you'll definitely want to go with others just in case.
EDIT: oh, and about the cows, don't worry about driving through the cows, just take it slow and quiet. they WILL move out of the way before you bump them. I never really knew what to do until I ran across a huge herd being walked right down the middle of a highway once. The rancher was like "You don't have to stop, just keep driving, they'll move!"
Check this one out - https://www.amazon.com/Guide-Arizona-Backroads-4-Wheel-Drive-Trails/dp/1934838195
I have it on my desk, its really quite good.
As the widely varying answers in this thread suggest, the size of the boat is far from the sole criterion you should be considering; people have traversed the oceans in rowboats. It's not comfortable, but it CAN be done.
Instead, you should ask yourself the question "What do I want to accomplish, and what are the options available to me within my budget?" The Pardeys circumnavigated in a 24-footer that I would find extremely cramped, but they were competent sailors, knew what they enjoyed, and they did a great job of it.
If you're thinking about production boats, this book would be a good place to get you started. In the end, it's a combination of factors having to do with you, the boat, and the way you intend to sail her.
I'm mystified by your desire for a 42 foot boat - and also a trailer!
If you're going to trailer it, you need to think about boats in the mid twenty foot range.
https://www.amazon.com/Twenty-Small-Sailboats-Take-Anywhere/dp/0939837323
Twenty Small Sailboats to Take You Anywhere
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0939837323/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_CAPWCb34QV9EG
These will be more in the civic line, although in terms of good little work horses, they can usually still play.
Welcome to AZ! https://www.amazon.com/Guide-Arizona-Backroads-4-Wheel-Drive-Trails/dp/1934838195/ref=tmm_other_meta_binding_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=
Je me suis débrouillé au final et j'ai à peu près acheté les mêmes livres plus d'autres en français :
J'en ai eu pour un peu moins de 100€ mais là au moins je suis blindé pour te faire toutes les trajectoires que tu veux :)
It's not a long trail 3.4 miles but it is a lot of fun as you drive on the rocks and there is one optional part you can play around on that goes almost straight down that the Jeep tours scare people on. Easily the best 4x4 trail in AZ and a top 10 in the USA. https://www.alltrails.com/trail/us/arizona/broken-arrow-4x4-trail
Now that you have a 4x4 in AZ go get this book and it has broken arrow in it. https://smile.amazon.com/Guide-Arizona-Backroads-4-Wheel-Drive-Trails/dp/1934838195/ref=tmm_other_meta_binding_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1523235879&sr=8-5
If you have a GPS the traxs are nice to have to but not required.
There are also books on this:
https://www.amazon.com/High-Frontier-Human-Colonies-Apogee/dp/189652267X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1468075898&sr=8-1&keywords=the+high+frontier
and:
https://www.amazon.com/Colonies-Space-T-Heppenheimer/dp/0811703975/ref=sr_1_1?s=outdoor-recreation&ie=UTF8&qid=1468075904&sr=8-1&keywords=space+colonies
Northern AZ XJ guy here. Not sure about local places around PHX, but a good place to start is this book and be ready to travel a little. There are a number of great trails and off road areas throughout the state. The southern areas require a good cooling system, and the when it snows up north, a good heater! A really interesting place to live; I hope you like it!
Guide to Arizona Backroads
its so much of a GODDAMN shame that these were never made, could have been, but wasnt.
http://www.amazon.com/The-High-Frontier-Colonies-Apogee/dp/189652267X/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1346594304&sr=8-3&keywords=high+frontier
For the downlink, sounds like you need a copy of SMAD. I'm sure you can find a free copy somewhere, but here's a link. http://www.amazon.com/Mission-Analysis-Design-Technology-Library/dp/1881883108
Specifically, it discusses the link budget equation in great detail. A necessary estimate of the type of power/antenna/frequency/datarate configuration you'll need. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_budget#Equation
That said, the old team I was a part of used a UHF radio at ~700 MHz for our simple 9600 bps beaconing system. For one spacecraft, that was our only way of downlinking pictures, and yes, it tooks quite a few passes to get a full-res image. Compression sure helps.
For higher datarates, people typically move to an S-Band radio, which we did for subsequent cubesats. As a general rule, higher frequency means you can shove more data into the transmission. However, keep in mind your frequency's interaction with the atmosphere.
That said, I'm not an EE, I just worked with a bunch of 'em. :D
Totally possible. Check out John Vigors "20 Small Boats to take you anywhere".
You don't say what your budget is, but Seawards are awesome trailer sailors that can cruise anywhere. http://www.seawardyachts.com/ They are obviously not cheap. Good luck!
I find there's a lot of information on forums for popular boats regarding their mechanical and construction deficiencies. E.g. Discussion on certain boats getting blisters, or needing bulkhead replacements. However, there's basically no information on design deficiencies, and most of the discussion you do find is pure speculation. The reason for this is because boat design is more of a tradeoff of different qualities. You want to research these qualities as much as possible. For instance: displacement, sail area, keel type, hull construction, cabin layout, cockpit size and layout, water line length, ability for the boat to right itself and how it affects stability, etc. Most of the information on these subjects is available on books and not necessarily easily accessible on the web. Here are some good books:
Now, these books are slanted on offshore sailing which is what I'm interested in. You didn't specify where you'd be sailing or how you'd be using it. My guess is general weekend cruising.
So no, I haven't seen any discussion on the differences between boats like that. You have to make an informed decision on the data available (e.g. of sailboatdata.com, class association sites, owner postings on forums, etc). Best thing to do is ask people who have knowledge once you've narrowed it down. The truth of the matter is, no matter what boat you get you will have to deal with the tradeoffs. Some guy saying that "X" boat is slow or fast is completely subjective and doesn't mean a damn thing to you. You have to figure out what the qualities you want are first and find the boat that best fits those qualities.
Lastly, if this is your first boat please go small and with something that you can easily sell again. Chances are your wants and needs will change, and dumping a whole bunch of money into the wrong boat may be a big mistake. Get something simple that is easy to maintain, so you can learn how to properly maintain a sailboat. The mistakes you will make will not be a big deal on a small boat, but if you buy a 40 ft Catalina a small mistake can balloon very quickly.
I bought this book a few years ago when I needed to start designing more complex injection molded parts. I still reference it. Great easy to read book. https://www.amazon.com/Plastic-Part-Design-Injection-Molding/dp/1569904367
So, coastal cruiser, homebase Maine, 'Snowbird' itinerary.
That leaves the budget question as the big variable we need if you want specific recommendations. You can do this at many different $$$ levels...but the boat selection and priorities will change.
This is a good place to start: Greg Nestor - "Twenty affordable sailboats to take you anywhere"
http://www.amazon.com/Twenty-Affordable-Sailboats-Anywhere-ebook/dp/B00422LH04/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1368355828&sr=1-1&keywords=Nestor+sail
If you need to go for less $$$...that means either smaller, older, or more 'sweat equity' by you. Don't give up here. Many sailors have years of fullfilling cruising under the 'go small, go simple, go early' approach. Refer to this very similar book by John Vigor - "Twenty small sailboats to take you anywhere"
http://www.amazon.com/Twenty-Small-Sailboats-Take-Anywhere/dp/0939837323/ref=sr_1_cc_2?s=aps&ie=UTF8&qid=1368355337&sr=1-2-catcorr&keywords=Vigor+sail
Plan on 50% of purchase cost, additional, to put it right, depending on the boat and your plans. Strongly consider a survey for the boat that is the "one". They cost too damn much to do more than one, but can save you from that BIG mistake.
There are a few injection molding guides on Amazon. Here’s one that I found. Search on Amazon and other used book sites. I bet you can find something for $30.
It seems that your comment contains 1 or more links that are hard to tap for mobile users.
I will extend those so they're easier for our sausage fingers to click!
Here is link number 1 - Previous text "one"
----
^Please ^PM ^/u/eganwall ^with ^issues ^or ^feedback! ^| ^Delete
As an engineering manager for a contract manufacturing firm that specializes in Plastic Injection molding, if you're looking at "free" online resources, the "best" I've run across is [The GE Plastic Design Guide](http://www.manterra.com/GE_Design_Guide.pdf)
For non-free, the "gold standard" is [Malloy](https://www.amazon.com/Plastic-Part-Design-Injection-Molding/dp/1569904367)
I have the older version of this book, which I quite like:
https://www.amazon.com/Plastic-Part-Design-Injection-Molding/dp/1569904367/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1488321538&sr=1-1&keywords=plastic+part+design+for+injection+molding
I imagine this one has some nice updates.
https://www.amazon.com/Mission-Analysis-Design-Technology-Library/dp/1881883108
This is the one. There’s a newer version, but my professsor profers this one.
There are several courses that ARO (usually) has, but ME exclusive program doesn't, such as Gas Dynamics, Low/High Speed Aerodynamics, Orbital Mechanics, Aircraft Stability, and Jet Propulsion. I based this statement from the school (CalPoly Pomona) that I went to. YMMV.
Book recommendations:
Aerospace is broad subject, you haven't specified whether you're interested in structures, aerodynamics, flight mechanics, or propulsion. I gave you a broad list of selection to reflect that, although I assume you are more inclined toward Astronautics (Space) part of Aerospace instead of Aeronautics (Air); hence you posted your question in /r/space.
Not sure what to say as words of wisdom, except that you should get a copy of SMAD III if you're serious about making this project work.
The JC2Sat mission was supposed to be about a year, though the satellites should remain functional in orbit for years afterwards.
I don't have any ideas for a science project to include on the reddit satellite, just keep in mind that that space-certified equipment is outrageously expensive so you might just want to do something simple (like Sputnik) for a first shot at space.
There are literally hundreds of companies which specialize in all sorts of space-certified parts, with most of the big ones being American firms. If you expect participation of non-Americans with any of the hardware acquisition/assembly/etc, you'll probably run into ITAR restrictions at some point. For all the good that comes with international collaboration on space projects, ITAR pretty much negates it all. You wouldn't believe the hoops that non-American persons and companies have to jump through in order to buy something as simple as a space-certified hinge from an American firm...
You can look for an old copy of Mark's Handbook. This is a handy guide to pretty much everything to do with mechanical engineering.
Marks Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers
So good. Fascinating. Put it this way: if you don't end-up loving (loving!) this book, then Mech certainly isn't for you. So worst case scenario, this is a cheap way to find that out.
Practical Electronics for Inventors is a great resource.
Investigate your local community colleges. It's becoming more and more common for them to have prototyping labs (with things like 3D printers and general machine shop resources) that are available (essentially) to the general public.
I use this in my Electrical and computer engineering course in college...
Practical Electronics For Inventors
We are really only going over theory and some diode/transistors. But it was cheap and it looks like an excellent book that I will keep in my own personal library
and 20 bucks aint too shabby
Practical Electronics for Inventors is an amazing book which covers the basics of essentially every aspect of electronics a beginner would need to know. Seems to have had a problem with poor editing but it's cheap (under $30) and still far better than anything else out there.
The Art of Electronics is twenty years old and is still pretty much the standard reference for practical electrical engineering topics. Some sections show their age but still incredibly useful. A new edition is supposed to be coming out eventually.
for a person with a visual mind I would suggest you start with [practical electronics for inventors] (http://www.amazon.com/Practical-Electronics-Inventors-2-E/dp/0071452818/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1373135646&sr=8-2&keywords=practical+electronics+for+inventors) and an arduino (a specific microcontroller with a lot of helpful tutorials) to [cut your teeth on] (http://makezine.com/arduino/). Once you do a couple projects maybe interface with a couple chips you'll be on your way to creating whatever electronics you want.
I've worked with some designers who had books like these:
Mechanisms and Mechanical Devices
[507 Mechanical Movements and Designs]
(https://www.amazon.com/507-Mechanical-Movements-Mechanisms-Devices/dp/0486443604/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1484237480&sr=8-2&keywords=mechanisms)
Honestly though, these books might be good bathroom reading, but design comes down to experience. The more problems you solve, and the more things you make, the better your designs will be.
Having been a design engineer for a while now, the absolute best advice I can give you is to talk to the other people who will be using the stuff you design. Starting out, your designs aren't going to be the most elegant. Focus on getting something that is functional.
Then, talk to the machinist who is making the parts. He'll have some advice on what features are difficult to machine, or some features you could include that make your parts easier to manufacture, such as adding a flat surface to use as a datum for machining setups, or "bonus holes" that can be used for lifting or securing the parts on the machine. Maybe if you loosen some tolerances, he can order a piece of mill standard pipe instead of having to hog out a huge piece of round stock. Maybe if you tweak the geometry just a little bit, the part can be made on a manual machine instead of having to wait for the 5 axis CNC to open up.
Talk to the techs who have to operate or maintain the machines. What makes their jobs difficult? They'll know best what parts are hard to access, or which tightly packed assemblies don't have clearances to fit tools in, or what's constantly breaking and needs to be replaced often. They'll show you the "custom made tools" that they improvise so that they can actually work with your equipment.
Talk to the people in procurement, or your suppliers and vendors. Is there cheaper hardware you could use? Maybe switching materials would make it easier to source raw stock. Maybe there's an off-the-shelf coupling you could use instead of machining a custom bracket to join two components. These guys work with lots of other people in your industry, and will gladly share "how the other guy did it".
Well the whole field of what you are delving into is categorized as Kinematics and Dynamics, which is enormous.
​
There are very many types of mechanical devices designed by various people throughout the world which can accomplish what you need.
​
Many of them could be applied to your system and only you can fully determine what the "best" one is, depending on your requirements.
​
This is a nice book to look through for ideas:
​
https://www.amazon.com/Mechanisms-Mechanical-Devices-Sourcebook-5th/dp/0071704426/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2CRBTTO3RT6RC&keywords=mechanisms+and+mechanical+devices+sourcebook&qid=1557683532&s=gateway&sprefix=mechanisms+and+mechanical+%2Caps%2C143&sr=8-1
​
As far as calculating things, it's extremely difficult without some knowledge of math and a little experience in applying said math to your design. This is pretty hard to do without formal education of at least the basics of these fields.
​
For example, do you know how to isolate the elements of your design and draw a free body diagram of each of them, without making logical errors (which are pretty easy to do by the way).
​
This is a basic engineering design method you need to use to perform calculations on your proposed designs. I don't think it could be well explained through a forum post. It would go much faster by having somebody help you out in person, or if you can do this, pick up an engineering book and read the relevant sections carefully so you understand them enough to apply them. This tool is initially learned in the fields of Statics, so you'd need a Statics book first. Then you'd need a Kinematics and Dynamics book to determine forces due to acceleration.
​
Looking briefly at your design, my first impression is that it can work. However, make sure that the linkage attached to the servo and the push rod and control horn never fully go parallel to each other. If that happens, you have no guarantee that the mechanism will return to its original proper position.
​
I can explain with a very disturbing analogy. Imagine your elbow can rotate 180 degrees so you can bend your arm backward fully, and for our sake, lets also imagine that this is totally normal and is not damaging.
​
Now imagine you are holding your arm straight against a wall so that the two linkages of your arm, the (1) forearm part and (2) bicep part are in alignment.
​
When you push against the wall, will your arm bend one way, or the other way? The arm has three options, depending on minute and uncontrollable differences: (1) If the force is perfectly horizontal your arm will not move at all and will continue to push against the wall (2) the forearm moves "up" and bends as normal and (3) the forearm moves "down" and bends backwards.
​
The same will happen in linkages if the they all line up. Since we want the linkage to always move the way we want it to move, we have to prevent this special position form occurring.
​
That's a common problem that people who have never designed linkages easily run into.
I use this one a lot for inspiration when I need to design new mechanisms.
https://www.amazon.com/Mechanisms-Mechanical-Devices-Sourcebook-5th/dp/0071704426
Mechanisms and Mechanical Devices Sourcebook might be nice.
Its like a museum of mechanisms. I like the 2nd Edition cover for a "coffee table book".
I have the Mechanisms and Mechanical Devices Sourcebook, Amazon. I have the fourth edition, but the link is the fifth. It's a good book showing how to design them and has a ton of examples.
For a stress guy, in addition to the previously mentioned Bruhn, All three of Niu's books are worthwhile.
as well as:
Roark's
Peterson's
Have a look at/into:
Good suggestion regarding #1 and #2, especially #1. I use my copy of the Machinery's Handbook regularly as a lookup reference; it's invaluable.
I'd add to the list Roark's Formulas for Stress and Strain. If you want to have either it as a reference and/or you don't know/don't trust your math, this gives you the formula for pretty much anything you need, mechanically. I use this habitually when designing anything beyond the trivial to double check my numbers. It has generalized/normalized formulas for stress, strain, deflection, vibration ,etc for beams, plates, shells, and the like. Oh, and the newer versions have the formula modifiers for solving in both metric and imperial units. If you are doing mechanical design work, this has a place next the the Machinery's Handbook.
Cheers,
The stock answers are Roark's if it was full of equations, or Shigley's if it was full of diagrams.
Maybe Machinery Handbook, but it doesn't sound like it.
I lost my 6th version and recently bought the 8th. I don't know where you're shopping, but it's under $100 on Amazon. Even the list price is only $135. Are you looking at the gold plated collectors edition?
Design is really complicated and encompasses a lot of different areas of engineering. If you're looking for an intro book to get started with, I'd recommend John Anderson's Intro to Flight.
Get one of the older editions for cheap(like the fifth edition). It's a good text that is focused on students that are not necessarily engineering. It'll get you started enough that you can start thinking about design principals if you want to tackle something like RC aircraft, a Flight Simulator, or Simple Planes.
I really like John D. Anderson's Intro to Flight and Aerodynamics books.
Chapter one of a different Anderson book, Introduction to Flight has a good overview of the history. He also wrote a book just on history of aerodynamics that might be more useful to you.
>a low pressure zone which pulls on the top of the wing
There is not really a pulling effect, it merely doesn't push down as much as the air is pushing up on the bottom of the wing.
>The engines are responsible for this
Do you mean thrust vectoring engines (tilted up relative to the flight path)? If so, normally this isn't a significant contributing factor as compared to the lift from the wings, with some exceptions (I can only think of fighter jets with high T/W ratios that can pretty much ascend vertically). Upon reading it again I don't think you mean trust vectoring, but I still don't know what you're getting at with this...
>wings in level flight are pitched upwards
Uhh, you really don't want to do this as you drastically increase drag. Most aircraft have cambered airfoils such that you don't have to fly with the wings 'pitched upwards' (called a positive angle of attack). Some planes, however, do have symmetric airfoils which have to be flown at a positive angle of attack, such as many aerobatic aircraft.
Sorry I'm being nit-picky, but some things just seemed a little off so I went and dusted off my aero engineering book to make sure. Everything else you said sees correct, have an up-vote fellow aeronautics enthusiast!
Then definitely go for it.
Pick up (or get it from the library) a copy of Introduction to Flight by John Anderson (you can also get the international version on ebay for like $40-50). It was (is?) the book used in MAE 262, which would be your first aero specific class. It's actually a useful text even if it's not still used. We ended up looking up a lot of things in it during senior design.
Regardless of which major you end up in, get involved with a club like the Aerial Robotics Club, Rocketry, AIAA, ASME, Wolfpack Motorsports. They all look good on a resume, especially if you end up in a leadership role, and they're also lots of fun and a great way to put what you've learned into practice and a way to learn things you wouldn't learn in class. ARC and Rocketry would also be useful for aero senior design.
Also, get a co-op or internship as soon as possible and keep getting them until you graduate. They help a lot when looking for a job.
If you end up in aero, AIAA meetings are a great place to meet and network with people from industry. They have speakers fairly often and sometimes the speakers are there specifically to recruit.
Good luck with whatever you choose!
The book The Millenial Project: Colonizing the Galaxy in Eight Easy Steps talks about a suit that is made from a material similar to lycra.
The anthology Armored has a bunch of stories about armored suits, and possible variations from those.
Imagine the suits to vary depending on mission and MOS. Infantry, navigation, logistics, engineering etc.
If we get all fancy, lets imagine that they are all made of smart matter, or quantum dots, or some sort of mix that allows high variability, adaptation, low weight, and lots of energy available to do the sort of stuff our hero would need doing.
Remember the utility fog in "Quantum Thief"? I imagine that these new suits would be pretty much like that, fast reaction times, not in the way unless needed, light, flexible and extremely expensive. Also, failure ought to be benign as to protect until rescued.
Titan is Saturn's moon, and yes, its ice volcanoes are one of the coolest tectonic events in our solar system.
As far as we know, there aren't any solid diamonds at the center of anything. Diamonds are much lighter than metals and other heavy elements, and would not sink to the center of a planetoid. Perhaps some pre-supernova planets, but those wouldn't have any of the heavy elements necessary to support life. Once we are traveling between stars, it's the biogenetic substances--like water and unrefined carbon--that will be the most valuable and useful to mine. With space colonization it becomes a matter of sustaining the continuing expansion of life, not space ships, that is most important. Fortunately there is a lot of ice on moons like Europa, and plenty of other valuable minerals and metals in the asteroid belt. There has always been a frontier: cyberspace has come and gone as the lastest frontier: next comes a space station! Once we've colonized out to the asteroid belt, perhaps interplanetary cyberspace will become still another metaphysical frontier to be explored?
I'm not sure where I was going with all of that. It trips me out.
Have you read The Millennial Project: Colonizing the Galaxy in Eight Easy Steps? I think it would be right in line with your interests. It is the most mind-blowing book I have ever read, making NASA look like a bunch of idiots and literally turning galactic colonization into a rather common-sensical eight easy steps, beautiful in their simplicity. If you have a scientific mind, this book will make you trip hard balls of intellectual goodness. There's even a website carrying on the book's legacy by updating the material as new scientific insights arise.
This picture is from the book The Millenial Project: Colonizing the Galaxy in Eight Easy Steps by Marshall T. Savage. Some of the calculations are wrong, but it is an interesting read. But you don't have to take my word for it.
Indeed, but it's actually from Neil deGrasse Tyson's new book: Space Chronicles: Facing the Ultimate Frontier. It's really good, but I'm only a quarter of the way through.
A physics degree is more than adequate for this kind of work. Your day to day would likely consist of properties testing (mechanical properties like tensile strength and hardness most likely, but also perhaps corrosion, chemistry, creep, etc, depending on industry), microstructural analysis, and failure analysis. With a degree in physics you should be able to pick up an undergrad material science text like Callister and fill in the more applied science gaps in your education.
There are a variety of introductory materials science books. The one by Callister is probably the most widely used, at least in the U.S., but personally I prefer Ashby and Jones.
The University of Cambridge also has a nice set of tutorials online, here.
Stuff Matters is a easy read without all of the calculations, so it's a really go way to learn theory without getting bogged down with math - it's also on Bill Gates book list. Also, this is the only textbook I've ever read cover to cover - my professor was a nut, but we learned a shitload. Good luck, OP!
Maybe you could use a basic crystal structure like the one pictured on the cover of Callister? (https://www.amazon.com/Materials-Science-Engineering-Introduction-8th/dp/0470419970) Its the most often used Intro MSE course textbook.
Callister is pretty common http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0470419970?pc_redir=1408455443&robot_redir=1
For Statistical physics I would second the recommendation of Pathria. Huang is also good.
For electromagnetism the standard is Jackson. I think it is pedagogically terrible, but I was able to slowly make my way through it. I don't know of a better alternative, and once you get the hang of it the book is a great reference. The problems in this book border from insane to impossible.
So that's the basics. It's up to you where to go from there. If you do decide to learn QFT or GR, my recommendations are Itzykson and Carroll respectively.
Good luck to you!
Can you get through a paywall?
Here is a tutorial on optical antennas. Pretty nice, if I do say so myself ;)
Jackson's electrodynamics has a chapter on the dielectric response of metals. Chapter 7, section 5. "Frequency dispersion characteristics of dielectrics, conductors, and plasmas."
Novotny's nano optics book has a brief review of dielectric response, and talks a lot about the antenna analogy.
Third edition?
At least, that's what google says.
Surprised no one has mentioned Classical Electrodynamics by Jackson.
For practice with your problems, Schaums' guide are the best. If you feel like a badass
I was going to do something similar but the second picture was going to be this
They may have changed now, but chemcical process principles probably still uses http://www.amazon.com/Elementary-Principles-Chemical-Processes-Richard/dp/047168757X
the thermo book is very professor dependent.
this was another one, but I think it was mass transfer http://www.amazon.com/Transport-Processes-Separation-Principles-Operations/dp/013101367X/ref=sr_1_45?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1398311420&sr=1-45&keywords=chemical+engineering+fluid+mechanics
the first book I linked will definitely give you the best head start, spending any time with any others would probably be a waste of time. I can find my fluid dynamics book at work tomorrow, but I wouldnt get too worried about it, to be honest.
This book ?
Make sure you have a good foundation in mathematics. If you want to get started for Cheme - definitely get yourself a book on material and energy balances. This is widely heralded as the "bible" and will give you good introductino to many cheme concepts.
​
https://www.amazon.com/Elementary-Principles-Chemical-Processes-Richard/dp/047168757X/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1541440878&sr=8-2&keywords=elementary+principles+of+chemical+processes
​
​
I have these two text books on PDE's
https://www.amazon.com/Partial-Differential-Equations-Bleecker-University/dp/1571460365
https://www.amazon.com/Differential-Equations-Scientists-Engineers-Mathematics/dp/048667620X/
The second book is more of a stereotypical cook-book math text. Idk if that's what you're looking for or not but it's inexpensive anyways and does a good job for its purpose.
The first textbook is very well done and is for beginners. However right now it's on the expensive side but when I bought it it was only 30 dollars. So if you wait a little bit the price may drop.
Also one last comment about the first textbook is that the order of the topics is abnormal. The first chapter does a summary of ODE which makes sense. However the first PDE material in the book covers first order PDE's which in my experience is not normal. Usually when people first learn PDE they learn about the heat and wave equations which are second-order PDE's. Idk if you care but I thought I'd just comment on that.
Check out Partial Differential Equations for Scientists and Engineers by Stanley Farlow. I've recommended it to another engineer in the past and he seemed to find it useful.
I used this book for my PDE class. It's meant to be supplemented with notes, but it does a decent job explaining material on it's own. That and it's super cheap for a math book.
Note that it has several errors in the answer key.
2nd the recommendation for Art of Electronics. I just watched an interview with one of the authors by Lady Ada. He was building things for his own lab and started a course for people who just wanted to be able to build circuits without becoming an EE. The companion book, Learning the Art of Electronics is completely hands-on. A practical course in analog and digital circuit building in a book.
OK, you seem like you are trying to learn, and are asking questions, that is a good thing, and even if someone cringes at your terms, that's OK, you have gotten some good links for the terms and how to use them. Don't be put off.
Now I am going to recommend you see if you can get The Art of Electronics 3rd ed and Learning The Art of Electronics, get the ones with the gold covers. They are expensive, but you will learn huge amounts by working through the Learning book. When I was teaching college labs, I would recommend students get these books (2nd ed at the time). You can find all this information online, and you can learn it that way, but these books are excellent and well worth the cost if you can pull it together.
I couldn't find the student edition for the 3rd now that you mention it, maybe it's on the way?
I did find a lab copy though https://www.amazon.co.uk/Learning-Art-Electronics-Hands-Course/dp/0521177235/ref=pd_bxgy_14_img_2?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=GQTJS7PC2N34TFHP7PSQ
In a word, yes. I know there is a way. I know it has to do with things like Ackerman and every other damn suspension variable. Unfortunately I do not know how to do it (engine guy here). Check out RCVD by Milliken. Good luck!
The 'bible' for vehicle dynamics is the Milliken and Milliken Race Car Vehicle Dynamics which has all the relevant equations and analysis to show how vehicles work. It's a really good book.
If you're looking for more of an intro book, and not so much detalied mathematical description, Gillespie's Fundamentals of Vehicle Dynamics.
Hayne's manual on Red Bull's first championship winning car, the RB6
https://www.amazon.com/Red-Bull-Racing-Car-Championship-Winning/dp/0857330993
If you like that, you should check out the RBR Haynes manual.
If you read these four Carroll Smith books you'll be more knowledgeable than just about every person here. They are by an large the foundational bibles of modern race car building, maintenance, and design. Don't let any engineer tell you differently. All of this info is easily applied to motorcycle mechanics, design, and engineering.
https://www.amazon.com/Tune-Win-science-development-tuning/dp/0879380713/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8
https://www.amazon.com/Engineer-Win-Carroll-Smith/dp/0615754090/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8
https://www.amazon.com/Fasteners-Plumbing-Handbook-Motorbooks-Workshop/dp/0879384069/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8
https://www.amazon.com/Prepare-Win-Bolts-Professional-Preparation/dp/0615547338/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8
I totally remember reading about this in Tune to Win, but I forget the reason why it was.
It may have had to do with the fact that they used Swing Axle front suspension, so the camber angle change during body roll was the opposite of what it is with double wishbone (the reason people run negative camber these days).
Get the STi springs. Subaru spent a couple hundred grand engineering them for a reason.
Are the strut bars bumping you up a class? If so ditch them and run in a more proper class.
As for the bodyroll, that might be a driver mod. Too much braking, not enough gas. Scoobies don't like lifting. That being said, your first problem is absolutely lack of suspension travel due to the drop. 1.6" is a TON of lost travel, and those rates are per inch, which you've chopped off.
I don't think your spring rate is too high, STi's are over 200 stock. But those Epic springs are 100% for looks, and not for handling. Even says so on their website.
>Epic Engineering springs are designed to give your Subaru a more aggressive stance, and increase the intensity of the driving experience while maintaining a smooth and comfortable ride
Further:
>The decrease in ride height effectively lowers the coefficient of gravity, as well as the front roll center and hence inclines the vehicle roll axis further up to the rear.
And, as anyone who's read "Tune to Win" can tell you, lowering the front roll center will promote understeer.
So change the springs for the STi ones. Takes an hour if you DIY and borrow the spring compressors from Autozone (or buy a set for like $40). Just make sure you get the cone washer on top of the struts going the right way!
Here's the video you were looking for!
You can also get it in book form, which I think goes into more detail.
If you're interested in going even deeper, Drive To Win by Carroll Smith is a good one, and you'll even learn what it takes to be successful in real-life racing.
Tune To Win also really good if you're interested in learning about set-up, but if you're just starting out then focusing on driving is by far the most important thing. The skippy car doesn't have many set-up options anyways.
Tune to Win: The art and science of race car development and tuning
It's never too early to start.
Machinery's Handbook
https://www.amazon.com/Machinerys-Handbook-Large-Print-Oberg/dp/083113092X/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1519088516&sr=8-2&keywords=machinery%27s+handbook
Mark's Handbook
https://www.amazon.com/Marks-Standard-Handbook-Mechanical-Engineers/dp/0071428674/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1519088467&sr=1-3&keywords=Mechanical+Engineering+handbook
Mark's Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers
https://www.amazon.com/Marks-Standard-Handbook-Mechanical-Engineers/dp/0071428674
Mark's Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers: has everything you would ever need, and more.
additionally check:
Stress : http://www.amazon.com/Roarks-Formulas-Stress-Strain-8th/dp/0071742476/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1426174330&sr=8-1&keywords=roark%27s
Machinery: http://www.amazon.com/Machinerys-Handbook-29th-Erik-Oberg/dp/083112900X/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1426174665&sr=8-3&keywords=Mechanical+Engineering+Handbook
General handbook:http://www.amazon.com/Marks-Standard-Handbook-Mechanical-Engineers/dp/0071428674/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1426174463&sr=8-2&keywords=Mechanical+Handbook
and this source as a list of mech. engineering formulas to calculate and plot:
http://www.fxsolver.com/browse/?cat=4&formulas=on
Practical Electronics for Inventors is an excellent reference for the price.
The Synopsys book club has a list of EE/CS books that are either the clear standouts in their topic area or at the very least a good presentation of the material.
Two less theoretical books you might also be interested in, depending on what you are looking for:
The Circuit Designer's Companion by Tim Williams is a good overview of the practical aspects of turning a schematic into a working circuit. Grounding, how to choose the right type of cap/resistor/inductor, EMC, etc.
Practical Electronics for Inventors by Paul Scherz is similar to the Art of Electronics but is written at a more introductory level. It includes a lot of the important small details that either aren't covered in EE coursework or tend to get muddled in the slog through theory and are therefore easy to forget.
Best way to get back into EE stuff is to build some projects! Hackaday and EEVBlog are your friends, as are Sparkfun, Futurlec, and Digikey.
all I want to say is whatever you do, DO NOT buy This Book I did and I literally have 50 printed pages of errors and corrections. It makes it really hard to work through when you have to not only worry about doing it right but if the book is even right and reference the corrections.
This one http://www.reddit.com/r/arduino/comments/2oenl0/beginner_here_need_advice_on_a_spider_robot_thing/
I posted a list there.
A motor will need more current then an Arduino pin can handle. If you connect one of the 2wd chassis motors under load it can fry your Arduino.
A transistor will conduct electricity when a small current is applied. So with your Arduino pins you can drive larger currents. Kind of like an switch... But Transistors will do more then that. You should grab a copy of "Getting started in electronics" (fun to read, not only for children, easy and still gives you a impression of the "inner workings" of electronics). Or practical electronics for inventors. Written well, not too complicated, but also includes a lot of important math and formulas.
Transistors, FET, diodes and such are basic components you will need all the time and it helps to understand what is going on if something is not working right. With a multimeter, the cheap arduino kit plus a bunch of transistors/led/capacitors and one of the books you are all set.
A H-Bridge module consists out of four transistors and can drive two motors forward and backward instead of just powering it on. These modules start at $1.30 but you can build them as well.
If you need a quick, dirty, and practical explanation of EE concepts, I find that the Practical Electronics For Inventors is a good book. Otherwise the other books mentioned in this thread are quite good too.
On the pure electronics side, I have gone through a lot of allaboutcircuits.com, but not all of it. I bought a "wee blinky" a while back as a simple soldering exercise before I was comfortable enough with soldering to trust myself on more expensive components, and when I realized that I had no idea how it worked I did some research. I quickly found this link http://www.falstad.com/circuit/e-multivib-a.html and the site has some fantastic applets of other circuits that I found very useful in quickly understanding how they work. It is much more useful to me than a simple circuit diagram at this point. I also picked up a used copy of this book http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0071452818/ref=oh_o03_s02_i00_details on the cheap, which is generally reviewed well other than it containing a lot of mathematical errors. I am comfortable enough with the math to work through it myself if I need to be sure of something, so that was not a concern for me. At some point I might pick up the "The art of electronics", but costs more than I want to spend right now.
On the projects side I have the Arduino Cookbook, which has been handy for helping me pick out projects to bite off from the comfort of my couch. It also has given me a good sense for what can be done in general and how much effort is involved. Obviously I keep an eye to the discussions here, and I also have spent time looking over the Arduino pages. "Interfacing With Hardware" (http://arduino.cc/playground/Main/InterfacingWithHardware) has some really good stuff linked from it. I look at the stuff John Boxall is doing at tronixstuff. I keep an eye on the make blog, and stuff on ladyada.net. I also look at any interesting Instructables I come across. I suppose I regularly scan most of the popular online channels for this stuff.
Other than that, I have just been biting off projects with no particular end goal in mind. I pick a component I want to get some experience with, get one, and do something with it. Then I pick something else and repeat. I have an assortment of parts on order from taydaelectronics that should arrive mid to late this month. When they get here I will experiment with them for a few weeks, and then order some more different things. Right now I am very much in exploration mode.
Edited for typos, and completeness.
Several people recommended more entry-level books in the thread, these may be a good pick if you want results fast. They probably won't give you a full picture, but at least you will be able to put some basic circuits together to see if it's something you want to explore further.
My coworker speaks fondly of Practical Electronics for Inventors, but that's all I have.
https://www.amazon.com/Mechanisms-Mechanical-Devices-Sourcebook-5th/dp/0071704426
I just got this book a few weeks ago, it is full of awesome mechanisms.
Depends on the engineer. If you're into solid mechanics, there isn't a reason that you shouldn't own a copy of Roark's Formulas for Stress and Strain.
http://www.amazon.com/Roarks-Formulas-Stress-Strain-8th/dp/0071742476/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1377448154&sr=1-1&keywords=roark%27s+formulas+for+stress+and+strain
Well...how in-depth do you want to get?
https://www.amazon.com/Structural-Shear-Joints-Analyses-Properties/dp/0791802388
https://www.amazon.com/Roarks-Formulas-Stress-Strain-8th/dp/0071742476
At the most fundamental level you're talking about fatigue, fracture mechanics, and the ole S-N curves. A certain aluminum will have a given Fty but over repeated cycles, even if you never near Fty, the metal will yield/crack.
Any geometric change (cutout, fastener hole, etc) causes a stress riser. An empty hole has a stress riser of 3. All of a sudden you dump 2000lbs of load into a fastener in that hole and you're compounding the stress. So it's better to gradually load up the material.
A quick and dirty calculation for this is the "fastener spring method" or "fastener spring stiffness model". Something like that. This is the basis for a lot of FEA models.
A lot of this is from trial and error. Like the cutouts for windows used to be square (with sharp corners) until half the fuselage got ripped off during a flight. Then they started making the inner corners of cutouts rounded.
I think if you google "aircraft durability and damage tolerance" you'll find some semi-detailed info. Although a lot of this will be about crack inspection, etc. some of it will be about repair guidelines/analysis.
These days a lot of fatigue analysis is done by Finite Element Analysis.
Roarks-Formulas for Stess and Strain
That book has endless examples of different geometry and load cases.
If you look at some existing examples, like here you'll see that they are basically a cone with a dome on the top and bottom.
Shells of Revolutions, Pressure Vessels, pipes are Chapter 13 in the Eighth Edition.
The Millenial Project: Colonizing the Galaxy in Eight Easy Steps proposed that inverted buildings were the way to go so that we wouldn't be taking away from our parks and making our view claustrophobic.
The twist is that it proposed building the cities on the ocean, so the inverted buildings would be underwater where you could see something. The cities would be power generating plants, shipping power back to the mainland in the form of hydrogen. The cities would also be training grounds for future spacefarers.
The Millennial Project: Colonizing the Galaxy in Eight Easy Steps by Marshall T. Savage
http://www.amazon.com/Millennial-Project-Colonizing-Galaxy-Eight/dp/0316771635
2100-2150: Earth gets its first Skycycle...
(also known as 'Rotating skyhooks')
Hey, falingodingo, here is a book that might interest you, Colonizing the galaxy in eight easy steps. While it is outlandish in the extreme, it also has this impossible grandiose vision of easy space exploration. I do think that, if we humans wanted to go to space we would achieve it through fast innovations and cheap designs.
Even if it is not volunteer anything, even it is for profit, we could go spending these 150billion or 1 trillion or whatever. But since there is no need to go, no need to explore (sadly) there is no incentive.
Well, we can always go in the Chinese or Indian ships, many years from now.
That's not a "hyperloop." It's called a Mass Driver, and it is a trope of sci-fi for decades and also is extensively discussed in the Millennial Project by Marshall Savage.
If you think you are depressed by the Trump administration now, read this book and leave yourself feeling like you want to eat a shotgun blast over the things we should be doing and aren't.
The Millennial Project: Colonizing the Galaxy in Eight Easy Steps
IMHO nobody should call themselves a futurist until they have read this book.
Space Chronicles: Facing the Ultimate Frontier
@HardHarry
How much do you think the US government spends on NASA per year?
Go read Neil De Grasse Tyson's latest book
http://www.amazon.com/Space-Chronicles-Facing-Ultimate-Frontier/dp/0393082105/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1332717037&sr=8-1
@yogthos
Tyson also mentions that those social programs have largely been addressed -- with typical government efficiency -- already. Alternate energy research is also in progress.
Other forms of science.... well, in these anti-science times that we live in, if it isn't bogus global warming science, it doesn't matter.
For other perspectives, try reading some different blogs:
http://blogs.airspacemag.com/moon/
http://launiusr.wordpress.com/
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/beyondapollo/
Dr. Tyson - Are you doing a book tour to promote Space Chronicles: Facing the Ultimate Frontier?
If so, will the schedule be posted on the Hayden website?
If not, and at the risk of bombarding the Hayden Planetarium with mail, is there a proper channel in order to get your autograph on said book?
Like most Redditors, I'd love to get it in person, but NYC is a bit far from San Antonio.
My copy is being shipped to me as we speak and I hope to start reading it as soon as tomorrow!
I really liked The Grand Design by Stephen Hawking. It gives you a perspective of string theory, multiverse, tons of stuff about the universe, origins of the universe, and the philosophy of science that is ment for more entertainment and informing than dense physics literature.
If your looking more for space stuff there is Space Chronicles by Neal deGrasse Tyson
I suggest reading this for some answers. http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0393082105
Materials science and engineering student here. If it's an intro to materials science type course, mwalsh2010 has covered most of it. Additionally, expect to index planes and directions in crystal structures, solid solubility, mechanical properties testing methods, phase percentage and lever rule calculations (under phase diagrams), phase transformation reactions (eutectic, eutectoid, paratectic, etc.), and various processing methods. You'll probably mainly study metals and ceramics since they're generally not as complex as polymeric and electronic materials.
This was the text book used in an intro course I took. I'm sure there's a torrent of it out there and should serve as a pretty solid resource.
Basic mechanical properties of materials.
If you would like more resources, feel free to PM me.
I agree about Felder and Rousseau for Mass and material balances. It is probably the only textbook that I actually reference (mostly for the charts in the back and the unit conversions on the front cover).
I also like Callister for general materials science information.
Perry's is a wonderful reference.
If you can, pick up a copy/PDF of Introduction to Materials http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0470419970/ref=mp_s_a_1_6?qid=1404346873&sr=1-6&pi=AC_SX110_SY165_QL70 Extremely useful book for all things material science.
halliday and resnick for general physics
1 - goldstein
2 - griffith
3 -
4 - griffith or jackson
I think it's that E&M is just a more difficult/less interesting subject. If you plan on going to grad school for physics you will almost certainly use this. You'll love Griffiths after dealing with Jackson, as Griffiths acts as a sort of Rosetta stone between English and bizarre Greens Function hieroglyphs.
A class using Jackson E&M for classical electrodynamics is a standard first year grad course. Quantum electrodynamics is part of field theory, and that's usually the next level up. Most people who aren't either particle physicists or theorists don't take it though (which is a shame).
Serious question: what makes you say these are the "standard route"?
[Griffith on electromagnitism] (http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Electrodynamics-Edition-David-Griffiths/dp/0321856562/ref=sr_sp-atf_title_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1407283809&sr=8-1-fkmr0&keywords=Griffith+electromagnism)
[Griffith on quantum mechanics] (http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Quantum-Mechanics-2nd-Edition/dp/0131118927/ref=sr_sp-atf_title_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1407283809&sr=8-2-fkmr0&keywords=Griffith+electromagnism)
[Jackson on electromagnetism] (http://www.amazon.com/Classical-Electrodynamics-Third-Edition-Jackson/dp/047130932X/ref=sr_sp-atf_title_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1407283929&sr=8-1&keywords=jackson+electromagnetism)
[Sakurai on quantum mechanics] (http://www.amazon.com/Modern-Quantum-Mechanics-2nd-Edition/dp/0805382917/ref=pd_sim_b_2?ie=UTF8&refRID=081X3T6SB9XHEZWNTVNB)
Probably some combination of Griffiths, Jackson, and Zangwill
I see. I went through this book: http://www.amazon.com/Elementary-Principles-Chemical-Processes-Richard/dp/047168757X and this book: http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Chemical-Engineering-Thermodynamics-Mcgraw-Hill/dp/0073104450/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1395417059&sr=1-1&keywords=chemical+engineering+thermodynamics
this is my very favorite text book from school. It'll get you started, although I don't remember if it specifically had a section on dryers or spray dryers, it has all the physical property tables you'll need, I think chapter 8 was relevant to your question.
this I do not own, but I've heard good things about, will probably have higher level stuff and be more specific to your application.
I like Partial Differential Equations for Scientists and Engineers.
My professor wrote this this book. It is excellent if you already have a memory of PDE's. It is also inexpensive.
That book is quite dry and abstract.
If you want more "why" and applications, try a book aimed at physicists or engineers.
Maybe this one for example
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Partial-Differential-Equations-Scientists-Engineers/dp/048667620X
I don't have any PDFs, but here is a good one you can get for pretty cheap. I used it as an undergrad and still refer back to it.
You might also try this Dover book.
Hope that helps.
I've used this one by Farlow in the past. It's got solutions to most of the common PDE's you'll find in other books, but it's a lot cheaper. It's also less formal than a lot of other books, which may be good or bad depending on your taste.
If you're looking for something that covers a bit more than just PDE's, O'Niel's book isn't too bad.
Graduate or undergraduate level?
If graduate, this is THE book to get.
This is much more applied.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Learning-Art-Electronics-Hands--Course/dp/0521177235/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1467118088&sr=1-2&keywords=The+Art+of+Electronics
Literally the bible.
https://learn.digilentinc.com/classroom/realanalog/
https://www.amazon.com/Learning-Art-Electronics-Hands-Course/dp/0521177235
back in the 90s I got paid to do the dynamics on a racing game.
so much fun.
hardest part was understanding impulse vs. force applied, keeping the time dimension straight.
plus figuring out the axis of rotation of wheeled vehicles, how exactly tires turn a car.
https://www.amazon.com/Race-Car-Vehicle-Dynamics-Experiments/dp/0768011272 is the bible of course but it didn't answer any of the hard problems I ran into, like how to transfer the (uneven) forces in the shocks into angular vs. vertical acceleration.
Do you have any good links for more information? I see what /u/Wozrop is saying from the theoretical model of friction standpoint but I see a ton of empirical evidence to backup what you're saying—and no doubt racers know this. I'm basically looking for technical explanations of why this is the case.
Edit: Incase anyone cares (or even reads this) I found an excerpt from Race Car Vehicle Dynamics:
>Tractive force F_T and braking force F_B are a function of slip ratio. As the slip ratio increases (numerically) from zero, the forces rise rapidly to a maximum which usually occurs in the range of 0.10 to 0.15 slip ratio, after which the forces fall off.
So, yeah, Milliken's 10-15% slip ratio finding corroborates /u/Kkubaa's statement. The chapter on Tire Behavior is pretty interesting; a lot more going on than simple problems from undergrad mechanical engineering.
Though not really applicable to the engine side, and likely too conceptual for the tire wear models, this one is really good from the dynamics side and translates many aerospace concepts over to vehicle dynamics (Stability derivatives, etc.):
Race Car Vehicle Dynamics, Milliken & Milliken
https://www.amazon.com/Race-Car-Vehicle-Dynamics-Experiments/dp/0768011272
It's not fully online, though you might find a PDF around, is this: http://www.amazon.com/Red-Bull-Racing-Car-Championship-Winning/dp/0857330993/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1410571889&sr=1-1&keywords=f1+engineering
Have you read this beauty?
Haynes RB6 Red Bull manual
Its a pretty technical in depth look into practically every part of a formula 1 car
Good book and the one I came in here to recommend.
Red Bull put out a shop manual for the RB6(?) A few years back. It's got a lot of really interesting stuff in it.
https://www.amazon.com/Red-Bull-Racing-Car-Championship-Winning/dp/0857330993
For people looking for the technical book about the ins and outs of an F1 car (RB6).
>And weight on that tire would just be taking away from your other tires.
Except that's a good thing...
For tires to generate lateral force, they need a normal load on them (i.e. weight) and they need to slip (hence slip angle).
So by that logic, you just want to pile on more weight and you get more lateral force. This is true, but the problem is that pneumatic tires have a sensitivity to that weight. This means that for more and more load you pile on them, the less lateral force you get back. It's why race cars want to always be as low as possible, you transfer less weight.
Essentially, because the weight got transferred off the tire, it lost more lateral force capability than the outside tire gained.
If you don't believe me, read either:
The Racing & High Performance Tire by Haney
or
Tune to Win by Carroll Smith
or
Fundamentals of Vehicle Dynamics by Gillespie
or
RCVD by Milliken and Milliken
or you can choose to ignore a random person on the internet that says he has several years of engineering experience for several racing series.
Tune To Win would be my recommendation by Carroll Smith, old but very informative.
I started to read "The Perfect Corner" and whilst there is nothing wrong with it, it's not my go to book, but that is just my personal opinion which doesn't mean it's right for everyone.
What is it exactly that you've always wanted? I'm guessing the answer is not round-the-buoys racing :) Regardless, you're going to need to get some experience with the basics before people start trusting you with their lives on the open ocean.
Really though, sailing isn't hard. Check out your local sailing clubs, crew for a bit, see if you still love it. If you do, study up on piloting, navigation and the "rules of the road", then rather than being under some skipper's thumb, think about buying your own boat. Check out 20 Small Sailboats To Take You Anywhere from your local library. For the cost of a few month's rent you will have a simple, capable vessel that you can sail wherever you want. Living on a sailboat can be very inexpensive (though it can also be quite expensive).
Good luck, live your dream, and thanks for your service in Afghanistan.
Here is a good snap fit guide:
http://web.mit.edu/2.75/resources/random/Snap-Fit%20Design%20Manual.pdf
Also we have this book in our library at work:
Plastic Part Design for Injection Molding 2E: An Introduction https://www.amazon.com/dp/1569904367/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_AjduzbRTN0ZFN
As a general starting point I recommend this book: Guide to Arizona Backroads & 4-Wheel-Drive Trails 2nd Edition https://www.amazon.com/dp/1934838195/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_1Ad2Cb53V8G9T
I agree it’s not a reputable blue water boat, but the Catalina 27 is listed in Twenty Small Sailboats to Take You Anywhere because many people have crossed oceans in it.
John Vigors 20 small sailboats to take you anywhere:
https://www.amazon.com/Twenty-Small-Sailboats-Take-Anywhere/dp/0939837323/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1499492768&sr=8-1&keywords=20+small+sailboats+to+take+you+anywhere
https://www.amazon.com/Twenty-Small-Sailboats-Take-Anywhere/dp/0939837323/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1537674975&sr=8-1&keywords=small+boats+to+take+you+anywhere
I don’t live in Arizona, but my dad bought this guys book for California in the 80s. He has new ones and I use them for California. He has an Arizona book. I would strongly encourage it.
https://www.amazon.com/Guide-Arizona-Backroads-4-Wheel-Drive-Trails/dp/1934838195
This is a really good one:
Plastic Part Design for Injection Molding 2E: An Introduction https://www.amazon.com/dp/1569904367/ref=cm_sw_r_awd_YhdSub1FSJ2NJ
join every group/ club you can. Forums, facebook, whatever. it'll take a while to find a group of guys that are into the same style/difficulty as you. wheel with all of them.
I don't recommend going out alone, but if you must this book has solid trails and will keep ya out of trouble
https://www.amazon.com/Guide-Arizona-Backroads-4-Wheel-Drive-Trails/dp/1934838195
This book has gps, maps, trail ratings, detailed descriptions, etc, for southern arizona off-roading: Arizona Trails Southern Region
This one is good, too:
Arizona backroads and 4-wheel drive trails
Both have helpful notes on difficulty/obstacles, as well as notes on whether or not there's a lot of brush to scratch up your paint...
And... Charoleau Gap is pretty exciting, but there's no trouble you can't back straight out of if you don't like it...
Though it isn't a toroid or a bernal sphere like O'Neill's designs, my station, Island One, is the Kerbals first home in space. It is the start of their progress in ensuring thriving continuation of their race, and bringing the benefits of space industry to Kerbal.
Future plans for my rebuild in .21 include a fuel depot, kethane refinery, vehicles for Mun/Island One transfer with kethane, and way less parts. All the batteries on the power module and monopropellant tanks on the housing module are killing me!
For the curious:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerard_K._O'Neill
http://www.amazon.com/The-High-Frontier-Colonies-Apogee/dp/189652267X
Mods Used:
HOME
Salyut
KW Rocketry
Plastic Part Design for Injection Molding is probably one of the best books out there on the design of plastic parts. Might also be worth looking into a course or book for injection mold tool design since understanding, draft, parting lines, shutoff, ejection, lifters, gates & runners and all other stuff that contribute to the limitations of plastic part design.
As someone in a similar situation, I'd recommend these two books. They're what were were taught with when I was in college for my Plastics Engineering degree (Bachelors at Umass Lowell). I've had both of the authors as professors.
I'd also recommend this book by Professor Kazmer: Injection Mold Design Engineering if you want to design the mold of a injection molded part. DON"T OVERLOOK THIS. A lot of times our professors were explaining how they'd have to help companies who designed a good part that couldn't physically be molded.
The previous book mentioned by Professor Malloy: Plastic Part Design for Injection Molding 2E: An Introduction is for actually designing the part.
Also, make sure that you get a book on polymer material science. Learn about the different types of plastics, how they handle, ect.
Start with reading some simpler PDFs from resin suppliers like this one.
A big thing to consider is also this: Does the company
IIRC The High Frontier: Human Colonies in Space, O'Neil (Bezos' professor cited in the article) sustained that pollution wouldn't ever be a problem in space because any undesired substance would be simply vented out of the habitat and solar wind would disperse it through hundreds of millions of miles of vacuum, all the way to insterstellar space. Like what happens in a comet tail. It was indeed one of his points in advocating that space was far better for an industrial civilization than a planetary surface like Earth's, where all shit that we produce innevitably accumulates.
Of course, in the far future, with human population on the trillions and scattered all over the Solar System in those space cities, crunching asteroids, small moons and eventually dwarf planets all the time for more resources, I suspect that there would be too much exhausts and the Sun seen from far away would start to look vaguely like a planetary nebula. In fact, I would love to see some SETI project exploring the possibility that some of the planetary nebulas are indeed artificial byproducts of civilizations that scaped the great filter of staying in their home planets for too long and running out of resources.
> So, citing someone with a PhD doesn't impress me, I have one so clearly they will give them to anyone.
He wrote the book on it:
https://www.amazon.com/High-Frontier-Human-Colonies-Apogee/dp/189652267X
> Asteroids are actually really far apart (at least in our solar system) and our problems are currently mostly about getting to space not really doing anything once we are there.
That's why we'll be starting with near-earth asteroids.
> Though once you are there I agree it is not necessarily all that costly to get around (just slow), but then you have to either use the metal up there or also suffer the cost of bringing it back down to the surface without killing anyone.
Most of the asteroid material will likely remain up there, yes. Far more valuable in space than on land. But for the extremely rare metals that won't be as true. We will not be manufacturing with rare earth metals in space any time soon.
> This would work much better if more of humanity were in space already and so there was an industrial presence outside earths gravity well, but between now and then it will be slow going.
It would take some time, but it's already completely doable. What's missing is the and the vision. Musk has gone a long way there, his vision to drive towards Mars will do a lot for this.
Let's do a bit of numbers.
Let's for the moment assume you smashed several comets of water into the planet to build your atmosphere. You only have 40% gravity so you're only going to get 40% atmospheric pressure. To get pressure that low on Earth you have to go to 22,000 feet or 7,000 Meters. In case you don't know, there aren't any cities at that elevation as almost all people prefer to be able to breathe. The highest cities on Earth hover around 5,000 meters, 2,000 meters below your baseline number.
How long the atmosphere lasts is currently unknown despite your assertion:
>Incorrect: The atmosphere strips away over millions of years, more then slow enough for an atmosphere to form.
You didn't cite your source for that assertion. What we can state confidence is the current loss rate is being measured at the end of a very long loss process. If you look at vacuum pressure curves you'll see that most of a gas is evacuated early on - getting a really hard vacuum at the end takes a lot of time which is when the Mars MAVEN project measured.
Did I forget to mention that Mars doesn't have a magnetic field? The magnetic field steers the solar wind away from Earth so that when the sun hurls a bolus of hydrogen at us every so often, it doesn't strip away our atmosphere. Your 40% gravity is going to need that magnetic field help and it doesn't have it. Yes, there are ideas floating around on how to counter that issue but right now they're best labeled ideas, not fact.
You write:
>Incorrect: the moon has very little in the way of useful materials, which is why people are interested in Mars in the first place.
Absolutely no idea where that comes from. Hell, the Lunar astronauts brought back a large chunk of Anorthosite they found just lying on the surface. We've known for quite some time that there are plenty of minerals on the Moon. The astronauts weren't lucky, there's stuff all over the place. It's just damn expensive to get to so it stays put for now. It shouldn't be a surprise - the moon formed from the earth after all.
>Just silly: Do you have any idea how much energy it would take to move orbiting cities?
Yes, it would take huge amounts of energy. Fortunately, we have lots. You can go nuclear or solar - your choice.
Until it was killed by the 1963 atmosphere nuclear test ban, the United States had been working on Orion. Orion would have launched a skyscraper into orbit. When they were designing Orion, they built this building to keep the designers' sense of scale as to what nuclear power made possible. The building was scaled to be a cross section of the rocket. To reinforce the point, they were going to fly a barbershop with old fashioned barber chairs because mass wasn't a launch constraint as it is today. Cities are made up of skyscrapers and since we're mining the moon, you can have as many as you want. And you don't have to lift them off Earth like Orion was going to.
Don't like nukes? You can use solar power to sail around the inner solar system. Extra-terrestial solar won't generate power like nukes will but it will provide the energy necessary if you're not in a hurry.
I refer you to High Frontier: Human Colonies in Space for lots of details.
My last point.
Your call to remove my post is censorship to enforce a point of view. I may be wrong or you may be wrong or we may both be wrong but censoring each other isn't the path to truth.
If you don't agrees with a point a view, refute it. The truth emerges from that process. Calling for censorship to preserve a point of view you're SURE is right is what the Catholic Church and the Soviet Union had in common. We're seeing a resurgence in the call for censoring speech from people who really don't know or forget their history.
To add, to this, one of the ways for humanity to harness Sun's energy is a Dyson sphere. However, there are A LOT of technical challenges to overcome. A good book I read about some of the challenges and possible solutions to harvesting energy from the Sun is The Millenial Project.
I ordered the third edition last month, at the time I read that the companion for that version was not yet released. Is that the new companion?
I found this on amazon, it has a recent publishing date, but I don't see what version it is.
https://www.amazon.ca/Learning-Art-Electronics-Hands--Course/dp/0521177235/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1458182205&sr=8-2&keywords=learning+the+art+of
Few will read this but I highly recommend reading 8 steps to colonize the Galaxy.
The Millennial Project: Colonizing the Galaxy in Eight Easy Steps https://www.amazon.com/dp/0316771635/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_ZWAPBbT92H2SG