A question on this new cistern I've just bought.
How long will it take each of two pipes to fill the cistern if one of
them alone takes 9 minutes longer to fill it than the other, and 25
minutes longer than the two together?

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message ...

A question on this new cistern I've just bought.
How long will it take each of two pipes to fill the cistern if one of
them alone takes 9 minutes longer to fill it than the other, and 25
minutes longer than the two together?

Time for some simultaneous equations I think

Andrew

So which GCSE question is this for then?
These sort of stupid questions abound in such useless exams. The answer is
a fish.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
Remember, if you don't like where I post
or what I say, you don't have to
read my posts! :-)
"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message
...
A question on this new cistern I've just bought.
How long will it take each of two pipes to fill the cistern if one of
them alone takes 9 minutes longer to fill it than the other, and 25
minutes longer than the two together?

Cursitor Doom wrote:

A question

Can we have an OT: prefix on these?

On Sun, 13 Dec 2015 11:55:05 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:

Cursitor Doom wrote:

A question

Can we have an OT: prefix on these?

Why? Carpet laying and plumbing are not OT for this group? ;-

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 13 Dec 2015 11:55:05 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:

Cursitor Doom wrote:

A question

Can we have an OT: prefix on these?

Why? Carpet laying and plumbing are not OT for this group? ;-


Well the labourer at work did ask me how much laminate to buy to cover his
lounge floor. He had measured the length and width of the lounge but had no
idea what to do with those two measurements.

--
Adam

On Sun, 13 Dec 2015 12:30:05 +0000, ARW wrote:

Well the labourer at work did ask me how much laminate to buy to cover
his lounge floor. He had measured the length and width of the lounge but
had no idea what to do with those two measurements.

Labourer? You're really talking about your apprentice here surely?

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 13 Dec 2015 12:30:05 +0000, ARW wrote:

Well the labourer at work did ask me how much laminate to buy to cover
his lounge floor. He had measured the length and width of the lounge but
had no idea what to do with those two measurements.

Labourer? You're really talking about your apprentice here surely?


No a labourer.

--
Adam

Well, I'm quite surprised NOBODY got the answer after all the insults
about these questions being too easy.

The correct answers were 36 and 45 minutes.

On 14/12/15 18:42, Cursitor Doom wrote:

Well, I'm quite surprised NOBODY got the answer after all the insults
about these questions being too easy.

The correct answers were 36 and 45 minutes.

here's a nice one for you.

You have a 10 tooth and a 40 tooth timing wheel, designed for use with a
belt of 0.1 inch tooth spacing.

A 56 tooth belt is available.


How far apart will the pulley shafts be for correct (no slop) engagement
of belt and pulleys?

I actually never found out how to calculate this, possibly because I
found a site that did it for me ;-)



--
the biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with
what it actually is.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 14/12/15 18:42, Cursitor Doom wrote:

Well, I'm quite surprised NOBODY got the answer after all the insults
about these questions being too easy.

The correct answers were 36 and 45 minutes.

here's a nice one for you.

You have a 10 tooth and a 40 tooth timing wheel, designed for use with a
belt of 0.1 inch tooth spacing.

A 56 tooth belt is available.


How far apart will the pulley shafts be for correct (no slop) engagement
of belt and pulleys?

I actually never found out how to calculate this, possibly because I
found a site that did it for me ;-)



TNP, Ignoring the rest of the crap on this thread, do you actually want
to know how to calculate it (its not too difficult really) or are you
content to just use the tool?
Mail me direct if you like.
Bob

In message , Bob Minchin
writes
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 14/12/15 18:42, Cursitor Doom wrote:

Well, I'm quite surprised NOBODY got the answer after all the insults
about these questions being too easy.

The correct answers were 36 and 45 minutes.

here's a nice one for you.

You have a 10 tooth and a 40 tooth timing wheel, designed for use with a
belt of 0.1 inch tooth spacing.

A 56 tooth belt is available.


How far apart will the pulley shafts be for correct (no slop) engagement
of belt and pulleys?

I actually never found out how to calculate this, possibly because I
found a site that did it for me ;-)



TNP, Ignoring the rest of the crap on this thread, do you actually want
to know how to calculate it (its not too difficult really) or are you
content to just use the tool?

I thought it might involve radians so my brain went quickly back to
sleep:-)
Mail me direct if you like.
Bob

--
Tim Lamb

On 14/12/15 19:56, Jonno wrote:
The Natural Philosopher scribbled


On 14/12/15 18:42, Cursitor Doom wrote:

Well, I'm quite surprised NOBODY got the answer after all the insults
about these questions being too easy.

The correct answers were 36 and 45 minutes.

here's a nice one for you.

You have a 10 tooth and a 40 tooth timing wheel, designed for use with a
belt of 0.1 inch tooth spacing.

A 56 tooth belt is available.


How far apart will the pulley shafts be for correct (no slop) engagement
of belt and pulleys?

I actually never found out how to calculate this, possibly because I
found a site that did it for me ;-)


Does it matter, that's what adjusters are for, 'cos eventually the belt
will slacken.


Yes it does, because on small belts you don't need adjusters. They are
for lazy sods who cant do sums.

Oh hang on, its Jonno...






--
the biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with
what it actually is.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 14/12/15 19:56, Jonno wrote:
The Natural Philosopher scribbled


On 14/12/15 18:42, Cursitor Doom wrote:

Well, I'm quite surprised NOBODY got the answer after all the insults
about these questions being too easy.

The correct answers were 36 and 45 minutes.

here's a nice one for you.

You have a 10 tooth and a 40 tooth timing wheel, designed for use with a
belt of 0.1 inch tooth spacing.

A 56 tooth belt is available.


How far apart will the pulley shafts be for correct (no slop) engagement
of belt and pulleys?

I actually never found out how to calculate this, possibly because I
found a site that did it for me ;-)


Does it matter, that's what adjusters are for, 'cos eventually the belt
will slacken.


Yes it does, because on small belts you don't need adjusters.

Ah right !

Beneath a certain size the laws of mechanics, elasticity etc. don't operate.

There must be a Noble Prize in this for someone.

If only they awarded one for bull****, that is.

http://machinedesign.com/archive/ten...ng-belt-drives


michael adams

.....

On 14/12/15 21:16, Jonno wrote:
The Natural Philosopher scribbled


On 14/12/15 19:56, Jonno wrote:
The Natural Philosopher scribbled


On 14/12/15 18:42, Cursitor Doom wrote:

Well, I'm quite surprised NOBODY got the answer after all the insults
about these questions being too easy.

The correct answers were 36 and 45 minutes.

here's a nice one for you.

You have a 10 tooth and a 40 tooth timing wheel, designed for use with a
belt of 0.1 inch tooth spacing.

A 56 tooth belt is available.


How far apart will the pulley shafts be for correct (no slop) engagement
of belt and pulleys?

I actually never found out how to calculate this, possibly because I
found a site that did it for me ;-)


Does it matter, that's what adjusters are for, 'cos eventually the belt
will slacken.


Yes it does, because on small belts you don't need adjusters. They are
for lazy sods who cant do sums.

Oh hang on, its Jonno...



The same Jonno who taught you everything you now know about British
wine.

No. No Jonno has ever taught me anything about British Wine.



--
the biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with
what it actually is.

"Jonno" wrote in message ...
The Natural Philosopher scribbled


On 14/12/15 18:42, Cursitor Doom wrote:

Well, I'm quite surprised NOBODY got the answer after all the insults
about these questions being too easy.

The correct answers were 36 and 45 minutes.

here's a nice one for you.

You have a 10 tooth and a 40 tooth timing wheel, designed for use with a
belt of 0.1 inch tooth spacing.

A 56 tooth belt is available.


How far apart will the pulley shafts be for correct (no slop) engagement
of belt and pulleys?

I actually never found out how to calculate this, possibly because I
found a site that did it for me ;-)


Does it matter, that's what adjusters are for, 'cos eventually the belt
will slacken.

Even if it doesn't, without some means of initial adjustment,
elasticity in the belt under load can make it impossible to
compensate for the effects of tight and slack side tension in
the belt. Most importantly the latter.

Turnip at his best, as per usual.


michael adams

....

In message , Cursitor Doom
writes

Well, I'm quite surprised NOBODY got the answer after all the insults
about these questions being too easy.

The correct answers were 36 and 45 minutes.

It's called having better things to do.
--
Chris French

On 14/12/2015 18:42, Cursitor Doom wrote:

Well, I'm quite surprised NOBODY got the answer after all the insults
about these questions being too easy.

The correct answers were 36 and 45 minutes.

The question wasn't that hard, though Chris Hogg needs to think about it
a bit more. Stick an OT on it, keep going, I'm finding them light relief
similar to newspaper puzzles.

On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 22:02:29 +0000, Clive George wrote:

The question wasn't that hard, though Chris Hogg needs to think about it
a bit more. Stick an OT on it, keep going, I'm finding them light relief
similar to newspaper puzzles.

There doesn't seem any more point. The idea was to have each a bit more
involved than the previous and nobody answered the last one!

On Sun, 13 Dec 2015 11:40:34 +0000, Chris Hogg wrote:

BIMBW!

I suspect you are. ;-) Where's Dave Baker when you need him?