Hydromet wrote:Caco, thanks for that explanation. I seem to remember something about "...the closer the couple, the less the torque."
Always fun talking about torque Hydro and yes this is why a longer lever like a long spanner will provide a greater torque than a shorter one.
Your point is an important one because objects with the same mass can have the same rotational inertia depending upon where the centre of mass is located...
[bbvideo=560,315]https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=183&v=B5SX4MKyZts[/bbvideo]
In the case of the rotary Bentley, the mass of the engine contributes to the torque associated with the engine... the mass is integral to the moment of inertia which is used to calculate the torque and thus the resultant torque roll ...
Better but still simplistically said this can be put as "the mass is integral to the moment of inertia and resultant rolling torque on the basis of Newton's second Law which says ... "The acceleration of an object as produced by a net force is directly proportional to the magnitude of the net force, in the same direction as the net force, and inversely proportional to the mass of the object" and Newton's 3rd Law which states "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction."...
I'll talk less about torque now least we get into gyroscopes and precession which can be an obsession. I remember there was a poster on TOP called Shy Torque which I always thought was a clever moniker.
I am sure that someone like James May could provide a simple but far better explanation of torque as he always did when Jeremy Clarkson, who quite clearly hadn't the faintest clue what torque was, used to opine upon engine torque.
Caco
