Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my Bosch is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper unit
of power tool measurement. As far as quality of build well there
another story.

"cisco kid" wrote in message
om...
Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my Bosch is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper unit
of power tool measurement. As far as quality of build well there
another story.

The definition of one horse power to watts is 746.

746 watts = 1hp


---
http://www.basecuritysystems.no-ip.com

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.700 / Virus Database: 457 - Release Date: 06/06/04

"cisco kid" wrote in message
om...
Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my Bosch is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper unit
of power tool measurement. As far as quality of build well there
another story.

Here's a good read for you:

http://www.zyra.org/horsepwr.htm


---
http://www.basecuritysystems.no-ip.com

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.700 / Virus Database: 457 - Release Date: 06/06/04

"BigWallop" wrote in message
...

"cisco kid" wrote in message
om...
Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my Bosch is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper unit
of power tool measurement. As far as quality of build well there
another story.

The definition of one horse power to watts is 746.

746 watts = 1hp



Quite.

However, with the exception of cordless drills (where the "brand"
manufacturers do quote the torque delivered, ie the useful measurement for
the user) the power quoted is the input power, which as Cisco Kid says isn't
particularly useful...

--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

On 7 Jun 2004 17:53:55 -0700, (cisco kid)
wrote:

Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my Bosch is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper unit
of power tool measurement.

I completely agree. Input power is largely irrelevant, with motors
ranging from good and decent in quality tools to diabolical at the
bottom end.

It's relatively easy to measure input power and can also mean that
seemingly impressive specs can be written. The Precision Performance
Power Pro (or whatever they are called this week) routers from B&Q are
the epitome of this, with a 2000W input power (allegedly) but with a
performance equivalent to about half that at best.

There would need to be some standards for this, and probably to be
useful, a measurement method for each type of tool under standard
conditions - i.e. a cutter of a certain size on a router etc.

I don't see that happening any time soon, so in the meantime it's
necessary to be guided by manufacturer, price, and ideally trying out
the tool.


As far as quality of build well there
another story.

Yes indeed, but generally the same principle applies.


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 7 Jun 2004 17:53:55 -0700, (cisco kid)
wrote:

snip

It's relatively easy to measure input power and can also mean that
seemingly impressive specs can be written. The Precision Performance
Power Pro (or whatever they are called this week) routers from B&Q are
the epitome of this, with a 2000W input power (allegedly) but with a
performance equivalent to about half that at best.

There would need to be some standards for this, and probably to be
useful, a measurement method for each type of tool under standard
conditions - i.e. a cutter of a certain size on a router etc.

I don't see that happening any time soon, so in the meantime it's
necessary to be guided by manufacturer, price, and ideally trying out
the tool.



Suppose output torque would be a useful measure. Don't see it happening
ever, though... manufacturers will use whatever gives the highest number for
the consumer to read. Suspect a 50% efficient 2000W tool would always sell
better than an otherwise-identical 75% 1500W tool.

Amplifer power and music power springs to mind...

--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

In article ,
BigWallop wrote:
So if my Bosch is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper unit
of power tool measurement. As far as quality of build well there
another story.

The definition of one horse power to watts is 746.

746 watts = 1hp

Unfortunately the quoted wattage is input power and bears little relation
to the actual output. It's required by law to be on the tool.

--
*A nest isn't empty until all their stuff is out of the attic

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

RichardS wrote:

Suppose output torque would be a useful measure. Don't see it happening
ever, though... manufacturers will use whatever gives the highest number for
the consumer to read.


Yes, let's never forget how PMPO has replaced RMS throughout the lower
end of the audio ranges...

--
Grunff

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 09:16:25 +0100, "RichardS" noaccess@invalid
wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On 7 Jun 2004 17:53:55 -0700, (cisco kid)
wrote:

snip

It's relatively easy to measure input power and can also mean that
seemingly impressive specs can be written. The Precision Performance
Power Pro (or whatever they are called this week) routers from B&Q are
the epitome of this, with a 2000W input power (allegedly) but with a
performance equivalent to about half that at best.

There would need to be some standards for this, and probably to be
useful, a measurement method for each type of tool under standard
conditions - i.e. a cutter of a certain size on a router etc.

I don't see that happening any time soon, so in the meantime it's
necessary to be guided by manufacturer, price, and ideally trying out
the tool.



Suppose output torque would be a useful measure. Don't see it happening
ever, though... manufacturers will use whatever gives the highest number for
the consumer to read. Suspect a 50% efficient 2000W tool would always sell
better than an otherwise-identical 75% 1500W tool.

Exactly. The opportunities for the marketeers are there. That's why
I think that for the measure to be meaningful, it would have to be
related to the type of tool, or at the least there needs to be a
standard method of measurement for the tool type. For example, it's
easy to conceive how that could be done for a fairly simple rotating
tool like a drill or router, but how would you do it for a belt
sander?

Also, if torque becomes a measure of goodness, is that appropriate for
the behaviour of all tool types?


Amplifer power and music power springs to mind...

Yes indeedy.


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

cisco kid wrote:

Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my Bosch is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper unit
of power tool measurement. As far as quality of build well there
another story.


An electrc motors efficiency varies dramatically as the load varies. Its
not possible to give accurate output powers on them: Its not actually
possible even to give accurate rated input powers, since again as
voltage caries - and it does as batteries sag - the amount of input
power that doesn't *quite* cause meltdown or demagnetisatin varies
considerably (thats DC motors) On AC motors its still pretty indefinite.

Just learn your tools

"BigWallop" wrote in message
...

"cisco kid" wrote in message
om...
Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my Bosch is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper unit
of power tool measurement. As far as quality of build well there
another story.

Here's a good read for you:

http://www.zyra.org/horsepwr.htm



Here's yet another good read:

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question622.htm

and he

http://science.howstuffworks.com/fpte.htm


---
http://www.basecuritysystems.no-ip.com

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.700 / Virus Database: 457 - Release Date: 06/06/04

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 7 Jun 2004 17:53:55 -0700, (cisco kid)
wrote:

Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my Bosch is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper unit
of power tool measurement.

I completely agree. Input power is largely irrelevant, with motors
ranging from good and decent in quality tools to diabolical at the
bottom end.

It's relatively easy to measure input power and can also mean that
seemingly impressive specs can be written. The Precision Performance
Power Pro (or whatever they are called this week) routers from B&Q are
the epitome of this, with a 2000W input power (allegedly) but with a
performance equivalent to about half that at best.


It is a legal requirement to quote input power for electrical items and it
may just be that the manufacturers don't want to confuse everybody too much.

Then again ....... :-)

The Natural Philosopher wrote in message ...
cisco kid wrote:

Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my Bosch is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper unit
of power tool measurement. As far as quality of build well there
another story.


An electrc motors efficiency varies dramatically as the load varies. Its
not possible to give accurate output powers on them: Its not actually
possible even to give accurate rated input powers, since again as
voltage caries - and it does as batteries sag - the amount of input
power that doesn't *quite* cause meltdown or demagnetisatin varies
considerably (thats DC motors) On AC motors its still pretty indefinite.

Just learn your tools

Check out the Dewalt cat. lists in and output power on non battery
tools interesting reading

Steve

1 BHP (Brake Horsepower) = the energy required to move 1 kilogram 1 metre in
1 second on a level surface without friction


"BigWallop" wrote in message
...

"cisco kid" wrote in message
om...
Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my Bosch is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper unit
of power tool measurement. As far as quality of build well there
another story.

Here's a good read for you:

http://www.zyra.org/horsepwr.htm


---
http://www.basecuritysystems.no-ip.com

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.700 / Virus Database: 457 - Release Date: 06/06/04

JK wrote:

1 BHP (Brake Horsepower) = the energy required to move 1 kilogram 1 metre in
1 second on a level surface without friction


Only in the same way that one pound of cheese is the distance between
here and there, bypassing Tazmania.

--
Grunff

"JK" wrote in message
...
1 BHP (Brake Horsepower) = the energy required to move 1 kilogram 1 metre
in
1 second on a level surface without friction

snip


no way. schoolboy physics:

work done = force x distance
power = work done / time

therefore

power = force x distance / time

Your example does not mention any acceleration of the mass, ie implying a
steady speed, therefore as it is a level surface without friction (ie
gravity has no bearing here) then the force required to maintain this speed
would be zero (force = mass x acceleration). Therefore the power would be
zero.

--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

"Grunff" wrote in message
...
JK wrote:

1 BHP (Brake Horsepower) = the energy required to move 1 kilogram 1
metre in
1 second on a level surface without friction


Only in the same way that one pound of cheese is the distance between
here and there, bypassing Tazmania.


I was just going to say "no it isn't". I prefer your version!

1 Horsepower is the power required to to lift a mass of 33 000 pounds
through a vertical distance of 1 foot in 1 minute. A Brake Horsepower is an
oddly measured quantity only applicable to rotating motors that gives an
indication of what it can achieve if pushed to breaking point (no pun
intended). "Rated horsepower" is also used and is what it can do over long
periods (eg 1/4HP motor) at the output shaft under normal conditions.
"Horsepower" (as defined above) is the only fundamental unit and clearly
has no connection with metric units.

As has been said elesewhere, maintaining motion on a frictionless plane with
no acceleration requires no energy or power.


--
Bob Mannix
(anti-spam is as easy as 1-2-3 - not)


Grunff

"Bob Mannix" wrote in message
...

"Grunff" wrote in message
...
JK wrote:

1 BHP (Brake Horsepower) = the energy required to move 1 kilogram 1
metre in
1 second on a level surface without friction


Only in the same way that one pound of cheese is the distance between
here and there, bypassing Tazmania.


I was just going to say "no it isn't". I prefer your version!

1 Horsepower is the power required to to lift a mass of 33 000 pounds
through a vertical distance of 1 foot in 1 minute. A Brake Horsepower is
an
oddly measured quantity only applicable to rotating motors that gives an
indication of what it can achieve if pushed to breaking point (no pun
intended). "Rated horsepower" is also used and is what it can do over long
periods (eg 1/4HP motor) at the output shaft under normal conditions.
"Horsepower" (as defined above) is the only fundamental unit and clearly
has no connection with metric units.

One HP is 746W.

E.g., a 75 kW engine is equivalent to near enough 100 HP.
A 50 HP engine, quite common, is the equiv of a combi boiler.
Cars are now being rated in kWs.

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 11:30:18 +0100, RichardS wrote:

1 BHP (Brake Horsepower) = the energy required to move 1 kilogram 1
metre in 1 second on a level surface without friction

no way. schoolboy physics:

I was more worried about a imperial unit being defined with metric
units (other than the second) and the lack of friction.

Horse power is related to lifting a given weight in a given period of
time, indeed 33,000 ft.lb per min or 550 ft.lb per second. Though the
metric mob seem to have got hold of it and redefined it as 75kg/m/s...
this should be indicated by PS rather than BHP though.

Brake Horse Power I think is heating a given amount of water a given
number of degrees in a given amount of time. The heat coming from a
brake on the output of a machine. But after a fair bit of digging and
links all ending up in the same data source just presented differently
I found:

BHP = (RPM * Torque)/5252 (Torque in ft.lbs)

Which makes far more sense than buckets of boiling water. B-)

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 09:16:25 +0100, "RichardS" noaccess@invalid
wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On 7 Jun 2004 17:53:55 -0700, (cisco kid)
wrote:

snip

It's relatively easy to measure input power and can also mean that
seemingly impressive specs can be written. The Precision Performance
Power Pro (or whatever they are called this week) routers from B&Q are
the epitome of this, with a 2000W input power (allegedly) but with a
performance equivalent to about half that at best.

There would need to be some standards for this, and probably to be
useful, a measurement method for each type of tool under standard
conditions - i.e. a cutter of a certain size on a router etc.

I don't see that happening any time soon, so in the meantime it's
necessary to be guided by manufacturer, price, and ideally trying out
the tool.



Suppose output torque would be a useful measure. Don't see it happening
ever, though... manufacturers will use whatever gives the highest number
for
the consumer to read. Suspect a 50% efficient 2000W tool would always
sell
better than an otherwise-identical 75% 1500W tool.

Exactly. The opportunities for the marketeers are there.

You have to say "free". "Free watts with this drill". Then they flock in.
Like the "free" mobile phone con. They cost in a phone replacement every
year. So, if you don't get a replacement every year they make a killing.
People think they get something for nothing when they ring up and ask for an
upgrade of phone. Also the "free" minutes con too. If you don't use them
then it becomes expensive.

"G&M" wrote in message
...

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 7 Jun 2004 17:53:55 -0700, (cisco kid)
wrote:

Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my Bosch is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper unit
of power tool measurement.

I completely agree. Input power is largely irrelevant, with motors
ranging from good and decent in quality tools to diabolical at the
bottom end.

It's relatively easy to measure input power and can also mean that
seemingly impressive specs can be written. The Precision Performance
Power Pro (or whatever they are called this week) routers from B&Q are
the epitome of this, with a 2000W input power (allegedly) but with a
performance equivalent to about half that at best.


It is a legal requirement to quote input power for electrical items and it
may just be that the manufacturers don't want to confuse everybody too
much.

Input power? ENERGY in input, and POWER is outputted.

You pay for kW-hr of electricity (ENERGY), yet the electric fire is rated in
kW (POWER)
A boiler uses 50,000 BTUs of ENERGY and outputs BTU/hr (POWER) The boiler
may output 25,000 BTU/hr, hence making it 50% efficient.

Don't confuse energy and power.

"IMM" wrote in message
...

"G&M" wrote in message
...

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 7 Jun 2004 17:53:55 -0700, (cisco kid)
wrote:

Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my Bosch is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper unit
of power tool measurement.

I completely agree. Input power is largely irrelevant, with motors
ranging from good and decent in quality tools to diabolical at the
bottom end.

It's relatively easy to measure input power and can also mean that
seemingly impressive specs can be written. The Precision Performance
Power Pro (or whatever they are called this week) routers from B&Q are
the epitome of this, with a 2000W input power (allegedly) but with a
performance equivalent to about half that at best.


It is a legal requirement to quote input power for electrical items and
it
may just be that the manufacturers don't want to confuse everybody too
much.

Input power? ENERGY in input, and POWER is outputted.

You pay for kW-hr of electricity (ENERGY), yet the electric fire is rated
in
kW (POWER)
A boiler uses 50,000 BTUs of ENERGY and outputs BTU/hr (POWER) The boiler
may output 25,000 BTU/hr, hence making it 50% efficient.

Don't confuse energy and power.

He didn't (perhaps the confusion is elsewhere?), that's why he used the word
"power" when he meant power and not "energy"! You can look at input energy
or power and output energy or power.

Power is energy expended per unit time. On the input side of an electrical
appliance, the power is V*I (for dc, to a first approximation for ac). On
the output side it is (for a motor) how much physical work is being done per
unit time. Once you have run the appliance for a while you can say what the
input energy consumed was (V*I*seconds or, in your example V*I*hours/1000)
and how much energy was used doing the physical work (the rest being lost in
heat, noise etc).


--
Bob Mannix
(anti-spam is as easy as 1-2-3 - not)

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 14:16:47 +0100, "IMM" wrote:


"G&M" wrote in message
...

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 7 Jun 2004 17:53:55 -0700, (cisco kid)
wrote:

Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my Bosch is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper unit
of power tool measurement.

I completely agree. Input power is largely irrelevant, with motors
ranging from good and decent in quality tools to diabolical at the
bottom end.

It's relatively easy to measure input power and can also mean that
seemingly impressive specs can be written. The Precision Performance
Power Pro (or whatever they are called this week) routers from B&Q are
the epitome of this, with a 2000W input power (allegedly) but with a
performance equivalent to about half that at best.


It is a legal requirement to quote input power for electrical items and it
may just be that the manufacturers don't want to confuse everybody too
much.

Input power? ENERGY in input, and POWER is outputted.

You pay for kW-hr of electricity (ENERGY), yet the electric fire is rated in
kW (POWER)
A boiler uses 50,000 BTUs of ENERGY and outputs BTU/hr (POWER) The boiler
may output 25,000 BTU/hr, hence making it 50% efficient.

Don't confuse energy and power.


That's exactly what you have done.

Energy is the arithmetical product of power and time.

Both are input and output from a system.

It is quite correct to relate input power and output power.

It is not correct to calculate boiler efficiency on energy in vs.
power out. Introducing deprecated units such as BTUs serves only to
confuse further.

The correct definition of efficiency is in terms of power out vs.
power in on an instantaneous basis or of energy out vs. energy in over
a period of time, perhaps under varying operating conditions.. This
of course, does not account for weightings in methods like SEDBUK, but
that's another story.

The important point is that the same units must be used for both the
input and output aspects.



..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

IMM wrote:

Input power? ENERGY in input, and POWER is outputted.

No, energy is inputted, but the amount of energy inputted in a given
period of time represents the power input.

Once again, confusion reigns supreme on planet IMM.

--
Grunff

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 14:16:47 +0100, "IMM" wrote:


"G&M" wrote in message
...

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 7 Jun 2004 17:53:55 -0700, (cisco kid)
wrote:

Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers
seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my Bosch
is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper
unit
of power tool measurement.

I completely agree. Input power is largely irrelevant, with motors
ranging from good and decent in quality tools to diabolical at the
bottom end.

It's relatively easy to measure input power and can also mean that
seemingly impressive specs can be written. The Precision
Performance
Power Pro (or whatever they are called this week) routers from B&Q
are
the epitome of this, with a 2000W input power (allegedly) but with a
performance equivalent to about half that at best.


It is a legal requirement to quote input power for electrical items and
it
may just be that the manufacturers don't want to confuse everybody too
much.

Input power? ENERGY in input, and POWER is outputted.

You pay for kW-hr of electricity (ENERGY), yet the electric fire is rated
in
kW (POWER)
A boiler uses 50,000 BTUs of ENERGY and outputs BTU/hr (POWER) The
boiler
may output 25,000 BTU/hr, hence making it 50% efficient.

Don't confuse energy and power.


That's exactly what you have done.

Energy is the arithmetical product of power and time.

If you want to go backwards, yes.

A BTU is a measure of ENERGY. 1 lb of water raised 1F. No power there at
all. The POWER is energy by time hence BTU/hr for output.

You can have an electric motor turning a compressor. The compressors input
is power in.

To clarify for you:

POWER

The watt (W) is a unit of Power.

The kilowatt (kW) is simply 1,000 watts. A one-bar 1 kilowatt electric fire
or ten 100 watt light bulbs will consume one kilowatt.

BTU/hr is a unit of Power


ENERGY

Energy is Power x Time.

You pay for energy not power. What you have to pay for is the product of
power and time. This is obvious - the electric fire operating for three
hours is going to cost three times a much as for one hour. Therefore the
chargeable electricity 'unit' is the:

kilowatt-hour (kWh) Which is ENERGY.

This is by tradition in the world of electricity metering just called a
'unit'. What you are paying for is energy, rather than power.

kWh is energy
Wh is energy

BTU is energy.


BOILERS & CAR ENGINES

Although some people think of the watt (a unit of power) as an electrical
unit, it's not restricted to electricity. Boilers, whether powered by
natural gas, LPG or oil, and heat emitters (radiators) have power outputs
quoted in watts or kilowatts. So do car engines nowadays.

In days gone by in the UK, boilers etc. were rated in British thermal units
(BTU or formerly BThU) per hour (BThU/hr), which is POWER.

The BTU is a unit of ENERGY

The BTU is not power. Hence the division by time (BTU divided by hr
[BTU/hr]) to get power. People often speak of say, a "60,000 BTU boiler";
when what they really mean is 60,000 BTU/hr.

One kWh (energy) is equivalent to 3,412 BTU (energy) Note: One figure has a
time factor and one does not.

A 60,000 BTU/hr (power) boiler is rated at approx 17.6 kW (power).
Note: The time factor figures are reversed for power.

For the engine, horsepower was used, and:

One HP is 746W.

So a 75 kW engine is equivalent to near enough 100 HP.

GAS

Is charged in kWh (energy), just like electricity. There is a difference
though in that the electricity meter measures kWh directly, whereas the gas
meter records the volume of gas
used in multiples of 100 cubic feet (or in cubic metres on newer ones). The
calculation to get from volume to energy in kWh (energy) is shown on the gas
bill.

The conversion factor is not constant since it involves the calorific value
of the fuel, which varies from region to region.


THERM

Again, in the past, gas was charged for by yet another energy unit, the
Therm. One therm is simply 100,000 BTU (energy), equivalent therefore to
29.31 kWh (energy).

"Bob Mannix" wrote in message
...

"IMM" wrote in message
...

"G&M" wrote in message
...

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 7 Jun 2004 17:53:55 -0700, (cisco
kid)
wrote:

Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers
seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote
torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my Bosch
is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should
be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper
unit
of power tool measurement.

I completely agree. Input power is largely irrelevant, with motors
ranging from good and decent in quality tools to diabolical at the
bottom end.

It's relatively easy to measure input power and can also mean that
seemingly impressive specs can be written. The Precision
Performance
Power Pro (or whatever they are called this week) routers from B&Q
are
the epitome of this, with a 2000W input power (allegedly) but with a
performance equivalent to about half that at best.


It is a legal requirement to quote input power for electrical items
and
it
may just be that the manufacturers don't want to confuse everybody too
much.

Input power? ENERGY in input, and POWER is outputted.

You pay for kW-hr of electricity (ENERGY), yet the electric fire is
rated
in
kW (POWER)
A boiler uses 50,000 BTUs of ENERGY and outputs BTU/hr (POWER) The
boiler
may output 25,000 BTU/hr, hence making it 50% efficient.

Don't confuse energy and power.

He didn't (perhaps the confusion is elsewhere?),
that's why he used the word
"power" when he meant power and not "energy"!

So he was confused then, as he meant something different.

"IMM" wrote in message
...

"G&M" wrote in message
...

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 7 Jun 2004 17:53:55 -0700, (cisco kid)
wrote:

Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my Bosch is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper unit
of power tool measurement.

I completely agree. Input power is largely irrelevant, with motors
ranging from good and decent in quality tools to diabolical at the
bottom end.

It's relatively easy to measure input power and can also mean that
seemingly impressive specs can be written. The Precision Performance
Power Pro (or whatever they are called this week) routers from B&Q are
the epitome of this, with a 2000W input power (allegedly) but with a
performance equivalent to about half that at best.


It is a legal requirement to quote input power for electrical items and
it
may just be that the manufacturers don't want to confuse everybody too
much.

Input power? ENERGY in input, and POWER is outputted.

You pay for kW-hr of electricity (ENERGY), yet the electric fire is rated
in
kW (POWER)
A boiler uses 50,000 BTUs of ENERGY and outputs BTU/hr (POWER) The boiler
may output 25,000 BTU/hr, hence making it 50% efficient.

Don't confuse energy and power.


Excellent.

So, perhaps a 1000W diy tool rated for 3 hours continuous use should be sold
as a 10.8MJ tool, whereas a 1000W industrial tool rated for 10 hours
continuous use would be sold as a 36MJ tool?

That'd help (confuse).


--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

"Grunff" wrote in message
...
IMM wrote:

Input power? ENERGY in input, and POWER is outputted.

No, energy is inputted, but the amount of energy inputted in a given
period of time represents the power input.

Once again, confusion reigns supreme on planet IMM.

You need to read my post on this.

"Grunff" wrote in message
...
IMM wrote:

Input power? ENERGY in input, and POWER is outputted.

No, energy is inputted,

What is actualy stored in the drill battery? Scotch Mist?

"RichardS" noaccess@invalid wrote in message
. ..
"IMM" wrote in message
...

"G&M" wrote in message
...

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 7 Jun 2004 17:53:55 -0700, (cisco
kid)
wrote:

Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers
seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote
torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my Bosch
is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should
be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper
unit
of power tool measurement.

I completely agree. Input power is largely irrelevant, with motors
ranging from good and decent in quality tools to diabolical at the
bottom end.

It's relatively easy to measure input power and can also mean that
seemingly impressive specs can be written. The Precision
Performance
Power Pro (or whatever they are called this week) routers from B&Q
are
the epitome of this, with a 2000W input power (allegedly) but with a
performance equivalent to about half that at best.


It is a legal requirement to quote input power for electrical items
and
it
may just be that the manufacturers don't want to confuse everybody too
much.

Input power? ENERGY in input, and POWER is outputted.

You pay for kW-hr of electricity (ENERGY), yet the electric fire is
rated
in
kW (POWER)
A boiler uses 50,000 BTUs of ENERGY and outputs BTU/hr (POWER) The
boiler
may output 25,000 BTU/hr, hence making it 50% efficient.

Don't confuse energy and power.


Excellent.

So, perhaps a 1000W diy tool rated for 3 hours continuous use should be
sold
as a 10.8MJ tool, whereas a 1000W industrial tool rated for 10 hours
continuous use would be sold as a 36MJ tool?

That'd help (confuse).

Mo more helpful or confusing than it already is.

"IMM" wrote in message
...

"Bob Mannix" wrote in message
...

"IMM" wrote in message
...

"G&M" wrote in message
...

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 7 Jun 2004 17:53:55 -0700, (cisco
kid)
wrote:

Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers
seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote
torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit
when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design
limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my
Bosch
is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should
be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper
unit
of power tool measurement.

I completely agree. Input power is largely irrelevant, with motors
ranging from good and decent in quality tools to diabolical at the
bottom end.

It's relatively easy to measure input power and can also mean that
seemingly impressive specs can be written. The Precision
Performance
Power Pro (or whatever they are called this week) routers from B&Q
are
the epitome of this, with a 2000W input power (allegedly) but with
a
performance equivalent to about half that at best.


It is a legal requirement to quote input power for electrical items
and
it
may just be that the manufacturers don't want to confuse everybody
too
much.

Input power? ENERGY in input, and POWER is outputted.

You pay for kW-hr of electricity (ENERGY), yet the electric fire is
rated
in
kW (POWER)
A boiler uses 50,000 BTUs of ENERGY and outputs BTU/hr (POWER) The
boiler
may output 25,000 BTU/hr, hence making it 50% efficient.

Don't confuse energy and power.

He didn't (perhaps the confusion is elsewhere?),
that's why he used the word
"power" when he meant power and not "energy"!

So he was confused then, as he meant something different.


I see nothing in what he said to support that assertion.

OTOH you said:

Input power? ENERGY in input, and POWER is outputted.

which implies to any normal reader that you meant if you are talking about
input, you use energy, and if you are talking about output, you use power,
which is nonsense and implies confusion in your head. Electrical appliances
are rated in kW of input power - the opposite of what you said. The output
power in total, will, of course, be the same. The proportion of the output
power that does something useful (in a drill for example) is a different
(lower) value.


--
Bob Mannix
(anti-spam is as easy as 1-2-3 - not)

Bob Mannix wrote:

The output
power in total, will, of course, be the same. The proportion of the output
power that does something useful (in a drill for example) is a different
(lower) value.


Or higher, if it's an over-unity device. I have no doubt that IMM has
several of those in his well insulated house, and probably uses one to
run his electromagnetic water descaler.

--
Grunff

"Bob Mannix" wrote in message
...

"IMM" wrote in message
...

"Bob Mannix" wrote in message
...

"IMM" wrote in message
...

"G&M" wrote in message
...

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 7 Jun 2004 17:53:55 -0700, (cisco
kid)
wrote:

Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers
seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote
torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit
when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design
limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my
Bosch
is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it
should
be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe
the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a
proper
unit
of power tool measurement.

I completely agree. Input power is largely irrelevant, with
motors
ranging from good and decent in quality tools to diabolical at
the
bottom end.

It's relatively easy to measure input power and can also mean
that
seemingly impressive specs can be written. The Precision
Performance
Power Pro (or whatever they are called this week) routers from
B&Q
are
the epitome of this, with a 2000W input power (allegedly) but
with
a
performance equivalent to about half that at best.


It is a legal requirement to quote input power for electrical
items
and
it
may just be that the manufacturers don't want to confuse everybody
too
much.

Input power? ENERGY in input, and POWER is outputted.

You pay for kW-hr of electricity (ENERGY), yet the electric fire is
rated
in
kW (POWER)
A boiler uses 50,000 BTUs of ENERGY and outputs BTU/hr (POWER) The
boiler
may output 25,000 BTU/hr, hence making it 50% efficient.

Don't confuse energy and power.

He didn't (perhaps the confusion is elsewhere?),
that's why he used the word
"power" when he meant power and not "energy"!

So he was confused then, as he meant something different.

I see nothing in what he said to support that assertion.

See "used the word "power" when he meant power and not "energy"!"

Quite clear.

"IMM" wrote in message
...

"Bob Mannix" wrote in message
...

"IMM" wrote in message
...

"Bob Mannix" wrote in message
...

"IMM" wrote in message
...

"G&M" wrote in message
...

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 7 Jun 2004 17:53:55 -0700,
(cisco
kid)
wrote:

Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the
manufacturers
seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote
torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which
I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool
bit
when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design
limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my
Bosch
is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it
should
be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe
the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a
proper
unit
of power tool measurement.

I completely agree. Input power is largely irrelevant, with
motors
ranging from good and decent in quality tools to diabolical at
the
bottom end.

It's relatively easy to measure input power and can also mean
that
seemingly impressive specs can be written. The Precision
Performance
Power Pro (or whatever they are called this week) routers from
B&Q
are
the epitome of this, with a 2000W input power (allegedly) but
with
a
performance equivalent to about half that at best.


It is a legal requirement to quote input power for electrical
items
and
it
may just be that the manufacturers don't want to confuse
everybody
too
much.

Input power? ENERGY in input, and POWER is outputted.

You pay for kW-hr of electricity (ENERGY), yet the electric fire
is
rated
in
kW (POWER)
A boiler uses 50,000 BTUs of ENERGY and outputs BTU/hr (POWER)
The
boiler
may output 25,000 BTU/hr, hence making it 50% efficient.

Don't confuse energy and power.

He didn't (perhaps the confusion is elsewhere?),
that's why he used the word
"power" when he meant power and not "energy"!

So he was confused then, as he meant something different.

I see nothing in what he said to support that assertion.

See "used the word "power" when he meant power and not "energy"!"

Quite clear.


What the hell are you talking about?

The first mention of the word Energy was when you introduced it into the
thread, and it was not at all clear what you were objecting to.

Perhaps you would oblige and post the exact paragraph or phrase that you
consider to be incorrect because nobody else reading this thread can work
out what you're on about.



--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

"IMM" wrote in message
...

"RichardS" noaccess@invalid wrote in message
. ..
"IMM" wrote in message
...

"G&M" wrote in message
...

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 7 Jun 2004 17:53:55 -0700, (cisco
kid)
wrote:

Hi All - My problems with power tools is that the manufacturers
seems
to have redefined the enginnering term power and do not quote
torque
or impact values very often. I mean brake horse power - which I
believe should mean the actual delivered power at the tool bit
when
when all the other losses such as bad internal design
limitations,
gearing, friction etc have been taken into account. So if my
Bosch
is
delivering 500 watts bhp then with the same drill piece it should
be
worse than a 1000 watt NU tool. Of course it is'nt!! So maybe the
trades description boys should get in here. Or redefine a proper
unit
of power tool measurement.

I completely agree. Input power is largely irrelevant, with motors
ranging from good and decent in quality tools to diabolical at the
bottom end.

It's relatively easy to measure input power and can also mean that
seemingly impressive specs can be written. The Precision
Performance
Power Pro (or whatever they are called this week) routers from B&Q
are
the epitome of this, with a 2000W input power (allegedly) but with
a
performance equivalent to about half that at best.


It is a legal requirement to quote input power for electrical items
and
it
may just be that the manufacturers don't want to confuse everybody
too
much.

Input power? ENERGY in input, and POWER is outputted.

You pay for kW-hr of electricity (ENERGY), yet the electric fire is
rated
in
kW (POWER)
A boiler uses 50,000 BTUs of ENERGY and outputs BTU/hr (POWER) The
boiler
may output 25,000 BTU/hr, hence making it 50% efficient.

Don't confuse energy and power.


Excellent.

So, perhaps a 1000W diy tool rated for 3 hours continuous use should be
sold
as a 10.8MJ tool, whereas a 1000W industrial tool rated for 10 hours
continuous use would be sold as a 36MJ tool?

That'd help (confuse).

Mo more helpful or confusing than it already is.




It's a completely meaningless figure to quote and only has relevance if you
know the duration that a tool is used.

And if you quote energy input for a tool when it is used over a standardised
measure of time, e.g. 1 hour, then you are quoting power. so we're right
back to where we started.

We have an electrical power tool. The manufacturers have a legal obligation
to quote the input power. This is useful because it means you know what you
can plug it into (ie "do I have to unroll my cable reel or not?")

What we want to know as a (potential) user of the tool is how much it can
actually convert into usable power rather than heat in the windings, from
the bearing friction, etc.

So, output power would be rather useful figure to quote.

However, manufacturers are not obliged to quote output power, and only a
handful of non-diy brands do this.

Even if they were obliged to quote this, it is highly unlikely that they
would give it any more prominence than in small print because it will always
be less than the input power, and the higher the headline figure the better.

Now, what irrelevancies are you going to introduce now, I wonder?

--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 14:36:39 +0100, "Bob Mannix"
wrote:


"IMM" wrote in message
...



Input power? ENERGY in input, and POWER is outputted.

You pay for kW-hr of electricity (ENERGY), yet the electric fire is rated
in
kW (POWER)
A boiler uses 50,000 BTUs of ENERGY and outputs BTU/hr (POWER) The boiler
may output 25,000 BTU/hr, hence making it 50% efficient.

Don't confuse energy and power.

He didn't (perhaps the confusion is elsewhere?), that's why he used the word
"power" when he meant power and not "energy"! You can look at input energy
or power and output energy or power.

Yes I know, but he was jumbling them together in the same description
and that is not correct.



Power is energy expended per unit time. On the input side of an electrical
appliance, the power is V*I (for dc, to a first approximation for ac). On
the output side it is (for a motor) how much physical work is being done per
unit time. Once you have run the appliance for a while you can say what the
input energy consumed was (V*I*seconds or, in your example V*I*hours/1000)
and how much energy was used doing the physical work (the rest being lost in
heat, noise etc).

The point is that the comparison must be power out vs. power in or
energy out vs. energy in whether or not there is an electrical to
mechanical conversion.

Energy in and power out is not a meaningful relationship.

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 17:28:27 +0100, "IMM" wrote:



Don't confuse energy and power.

He didn't (perhaps the confusion is elsewhere?),
that's why he used the word
"power" when he meant power and not "energy"!

So he was confused then, as he meant something different.

I see nothing in what he said to support that assertion.

See "used the word "power" when he meant power and not "energy"!"

Quite clear.


You're flannelling.........


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 15:17:06 +0100, "IMM" wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 14:16:47 +0100, "IMM" wrote:


Input power? ENERGY in input, and POWER is outputted.

You pay for kW-hr of electricity (ENERGY), yet the electric fire is rated
in
kW (POWER)
A boiler uses 50,000 BTUs of ENERGY and outputs BTU/hr (POWER) The
boiler
may output 25,000 BTU/hr, hence making it 50% efficient.

Don't confuse energy and power.


That's exactly what you have done.

Energy is the arithmetical product of power and time.

If you want to go backwards, yes.

A "product" arithmetically means multiplication. This is what you
learn after you can cope with addition and subtraction.


A BTU is a measure of ENERGY. 1 lb of water raised 1F. No power there at
all. The POWER is energy by time hence BTU/hr for output.

BTUs and BTU/hr are deprecated units.


You can have an electric motor turning a compressor. The compressors input
is power in.

To clarify for you:

POWER

The watt (W) is a unit of Power.

The kilowatt (kW) is simply 1,000 watts. A one-bar 1 kilowatt electric fire
or ten 100 watt light bulbs will consume one kilowatt.

BTU/hr is a unit of Power


ENERGY

Energy is Power x Time.

You pay for energy not power. What you have to pay for is the product of
power and time. This is obvious - the electric fire operating for three
hours is going to cost three times a much as for one hour. Therefore the
chargeable electricity 'unit' is the:

kilowatt-hour (kWh) Which is ENERGY.

This is by tradition in the world of electricity metering just called a
'unit'. What you are paying for is energy, rather than power.

kWh is energy
Wh is energy

BTU is energy.


BOILERS & CAR ENGINES

Although some people think of the watt (a unit of power) as an electrical
unit, it's not restricted to electricity. Boilers, whether powered by
natural gas, LPG or oil, and heat emitters (radiators) have power outputs
quoted in watts or kilowatts. So do car engines nowadays.

In days gone by in the UK, boilers etc. were rated in British thermal units
(BTU or formerly BThU) per hour (BThU/hr), which is POWER.

The BTU is a unit of ENERGY

The BTU is not power. Hence the division by time (BTU divided by hr
[BTU/hr]) to get power. People often speak of say, a "60,000 BTU boiler";
when what they really mean is 60,000 BTU/hr.

One kWh (energy) is equivalent to 3,412 BTU (energy) Note: One figure has a
time factor and one does not.

A 60,000 BTU/hr (power) boiler is rated at approx 17.6 kW (power).
Note: The time factor figures are reversed for power.

For the engine, horsepower was used, and:

One HP is 746W.

So a 75 kW engine is equivalent to near enough 100 HP.

GAS

Is charged in kWh (energy), just like electricity. There is a difference
though in that the electricity meter measures kWh directly, whereas the gas
meter records the volume of gas
used in multiples of 100 cubic feet (or in cubic metres on newer ones). The
calculation to get from volume to energy in kWh (energy) is shown on the gas
bill.

The conversion factor is not constant since it involves the calorific value
of the fuel, which varies from region to region.


THERM

Again, in the past, gas was charged for by yet another energy unit, the
Therm. One therm is simply 100,000 BTU (energy), equivalent therefore to
29.31 kWh (energy).


Well cut and pasted, except for the deprecated units of HP, BTUs and
Therms which should be abolished.

However your original statement was

"ENERGY in input, and POWER is outputted."

and that is incorrect.



..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 15:23:58 +0100, "IMM" wrote:


"Grunff" wrote in message
...
IMM wrote:

Input power? ENERGY in input, and POWER is outputted.

No, energy is inputted,

What is actualy stored in the drill battery? Scotch Mist?

Energy.

However, it's use in the drill is over a period of time and so the
instantaneous input to the drill motor is power and not energy as is
the output.

One does not measure drills in terms of energy output but power
output.

Do remember that you are conversing with people with science and
engineering degrees here.....



..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 17:49:49 +0100, "RichardS" noaccess@invalid
wrote:



Now, what irrelevancies are you going to introduce now, I wonder?

The joule in the crown?




..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl