quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: Nnanji
ORIGINAL: thompsonx

My link says otherwise.

Show me...hold my hand and walk me through...where your link says a vacuum sucks?


I did not say that vacuum sucks so where are you getting that???out of your nose or your ass?

The term vacuum can be defined in two ways: as a space empty of matter, or a space in which the pressure is significantly lower than atmospheric pressure. It is the lower pressure term that has clinical relevance. In fact, for clinical use, vacuum can be more simply defined as negative pressure. Suction is defined as the application of negative pressure to create movement of air, liquids or solids

The Principles of Vacuum And Clinical Application in the Hospital Environment
Third Edition Authors: Bill Lamb, BS, RRT, CPFT, FAARC National Clinical Manager, Ohio Medical Corp. Wentzville, MO

Thank you for admitting I was correct the entire time. Now if you look at your post 135 in response to my post 134, you'll see that while you didn't understand what your link was saying you believed, at the time, I was in error saying that there is no such thing a suction. Now I believe you have that thank you thing you do when someone helps disabuse you of your ignorance.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: Nnanji
ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Actually yes. I first learned there is no such thing as suction in my 11th grade auto shop class. But, it was subsequently confirmed at the undergrad level in college. By the time grad school came around it was just something you knew. Like "food good...fire burny hot."


University of dumbass it would seem.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vacuum


Well even if it were, you have to respect the 11th grade auto shop class.


One has to wonder at the level of competence of an auto shop class with no vacuum gages. My phoquing studebaker has a vacuum gauge on the dashboard.

Now you date yourself a bit. I remember like it was yesterday when a block and a half from our house yep, there was a Studebaker dealer (of all dealers) 8 Mile Rd & Oakfield. and the Avanti came out. (in a small strip right on 8 Mile Rd. with a 24 hr. rest. a bar, party store, barbershop, dentists and drs. and finally a bank)

It was quite a bit revolutionary. 4 passenger muscle car, 289 (soon up'ed to 304) 240 or more horsepower with a Paxton supercharger. Even being a Chevy man all of my life, (dad caused that) I wanted one. But at $4-$5,000...way too much then. Now...fagedaboutit...

And that supercharger pushed air through the carburetor.

Yes, meaning the engine was not getting the full potential of the supercharger but because it was there, was still...not naturally aspirated.

That poses a couple of questions. Is a carburetor only natural aspiration and a turbo or super charger unnatural? When you turn on the shower and the velocity of the water creates a low pressure area that moves the shower curtain toward the water stream natural or unnatural? I don't think anyone would say that the shower stream of water sucks on the shower curtain, which would truly be an unnatural act. When a tornado impales a straw in a fence post, is that unnatural suction? Can't be because suction doesn't exist. So it has to be natural. When my knee is the size of a watermelon and the ER Doc aspirates it with a syringe is that not naturally aspirated? Since the plan the ER Doc had was to draw off fluids in my knee the fact his needle/syringe did exactly that seems to be a natural process. What is unnatural aspiration if the machine was designed by an engineer to work within the understood guidelines of physics? Where does natural top and unnatural begin when a system is designed using fluid mechanics?

The act of aspiration is the act of drawing (sucking) or inhaling a gas or fluid. It is my understanding and I think I am on point here, is that given that draw or suction is the only means by which that gas or fluid is aspirated or drawn in or out of say a given chamber or the atmosphere, it is naturally aspirated. Yes, suction is a lay term but still apropos here.

Once an additional force of air or gas as in a vapor or even I guess, a liquid such as a pump, turbo or supercharger is used, that aspiration is no longer natural. Hence the description of cars with a carburetor (no longer in production) or fuel injection are called...naturally aspirated cars or cars with naturally aspirated engines.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Suction vacuum etc are euphemisms that point to something else.

More ignorant opinion unsubstantiated by facts followed by your assertion that you are sooooo smart and everyone else is sooo dumb that they would not be able to understand your explanation.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

not everyone tommy, just you

feel free to cite and post your substantiation that an open air flame is aspirated

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: Nnanji


Thank you for admitting I was correct the entire time.

I have admitted no such thing.


I was in error saying that there is no such thing a suction.

I am pretty sure I mentioned that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: Nnanji
ORIGINAL: thompsonx



So when you suck on a straw in water it is not your suction but rather the pressure above the straw that forces the water into your mouth.
You went to which school to learn this?


Actually yes. I first learned there is no such thing as suction in my 11th grade auto shop class. But, it was subsequently confirmed at the
undergrad level in college. By the time grad school came around it was just something you knew. Like "food good...fire burny hot."

If that were true then water would spurt out of any straw inserted into a glass of water. This is not taught in grammar school,high school
or the colleges you claim to have attended. Suction causes vacuum. Vacuum causes a pressure differential so that the air is able to push the water up the straw.


http://www.biologyreference.com/Re-Se/Respiration.html
When these muscles are stimulated, they contract and enlarge the thoracic cavity. This creates a partial vacuum in the lungs. With the
atmospheric pressure outside the body now greater than the pressure in the lungs, air flows "downstream" into the lungs and inflates them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: Nnanji
ORIGINAL: thompsonx



So when you suck on a straw in water it is not your suction but rather the pressure above the straw that forces the water into your mouth.
You went to which school to learn this?


Actually yes. I first learned there is no such thing as suction in my 11th grade auto shop class. But, it was subsequently confirmed at the
undergrad level in college. By the time grad school came around it was just something you knew. Like "food good...fire burny hot."

If that were true then water would spurt out of any straw inserted into a glass of water. This is not taught in grammar school,high school
or the colleges you claim to have attended. Suction causes vacuum. Vacuum causes a pressure differential so that the air is able to push the water up the straw.


http://www.biologyreference.com/Re-Se/Respiration.html
When these muscles are stimulated, they contract and enlarge the thoracic cavity. This creates a partial vacuum in the lungs. With the
atmospheric pressure outside the body now greater than the pressure in the lungs, air flows "downstream" into the lungs and inflates them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: Real0ne
ORIGINAL: thompsonx


Suction vacuum etc are euphemisms that point to something else.

More ignorant opinion unsubstantiated by facts followed by your assertion that you are sooooo smart and everyone else is sooo dumb that they would not be able to understand your explanation.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.


not everyone tommy, just you
feel free to cite and post your substantiation that an open air FLAME is aspirated

It would appear that the army corps of engineers has added their voice to those who think you are full of shit.

Earlier this year, the Eternal Flame received several upgrades because it was experiencing some malfunctions. The corps’ Norfolk District awarded
a contract to install automated controls and a more energy-efficient system than what was being used. The work included new electrical conduit
and cable, as well as new gas lines, relocation of gas pressure regulators from inside to outside the vault to provide easier maintenance and, fabrication of new burner assemblies that are naturally aspirated to reduce maintenance and utility costs, according to Norfolk District
officials.

http://www.swd.usace.army.mil/Media/News-Releases/Article/478539/us-army-corps-of-engineers-keepers-of-the-eternal-flame/

You really do have a nice case of chronic dumbass.

the BURNER ASSEMBLIES are naturally aspirated, a burner assembly is not the ETERNAL FLAME, there is no such thing as an eternal flame, its just abstract artistic license, fuck you are illiterate with comprehension ability of a chimp.

For those who just dropped in my use of the term 'open air flame' is in reference to the dresden holocaust, (where tommy tard started with his stupidity), in which the whole city was burned, ie a bonfire would be an 'open air flame', ie not aspirated, and certainly would not have an aspirated 'burner assembly'

quote:

ORIGINAL: epiphiny43

English (and the language roots of it's borrowed words) is not Physics. There is confusing overlap between words correctly used in Standard English, and in accurate Physics discussions. Aspirate generally means "Breathed" (From latin/french) and is more commonly used as 'exhale'. In EMS work, it is the term for liquids forced or sucked (Wait!) into lungs, either by accident during a drownding, or deliberately (but unknowingly) by a rescue worker forcing a rescue breathing on a victim with liquids still in mouth or airway. Supposedly how Jimmy Hendrix died, vomiting while unconscious and inhaling his acid vomit.
In English, there is whatever you want to make a word for, and others find a useful term, or interesting concept, enough to remember the definition, and understand what you are saying. It is Not Physics, where terms have definitions which correspond to some physical observation, principle or theory, and get discarded from use if the concept or theory is superseded by a deeper or more elegant understanding, or is proven incorrect.
Thus: you can not 'suck' a gas. Any more than you can pull a string of unconnected marbles. You Can push a gas. What we call suction is changing the size and usually the shape a contained gas or liquid is in, and letting the gas internal pressure, exterior pressure from surrounding material (if in a flexible container) or gravity (if a liquid seeking to find an even level) to force the fluid to fill the larger volume. No force is applied, other than the kinetic energy already in the gas. Though force may be used to change the shape of the 'container'. Similar to liquids in gravity always seeking the lowest common surface ("It's own level), gases seek to distribute pressure and mass in any container to minimum entropy (No area of volume has greater kinetic energy than another). Pressure evens out quickly, temperature follows as fast at heat can move through the mass. "Entropy" is the key to why sucking is a concept, not a real phenomena. Higher heat or higher pressures always move to lower, and total energy in the 'system' is both minimized and homogenized.
Flame in a gas within a gravity field doesn't change the shape of any container, but it alters relative densities of nearby gas masses through localized heating, which expands and changes the buoyancy of that gas portion, such that it rises above nearby now cooler gas, which moves to fill the space below the rising hot gas. Which looks like suction under the rising hot gas, but is more correctly pushed down by displaced gas moving sideways by the rising hot gas, and by general ambient global pressure locally 'violated' by the area right under the flame.