Engines? Motors? I've got a better one :)

[jlabrasca]

Electric "motors" have moving parts your argument is in-valid.

I just typed the word "engine" into a search motor and found out that it means "trickery or deceit".

Also told the word "dashboard" refers to a piece of wood placed in such a way to keep the mud kicked up by the horses hooves from soiling your petticoat.

 

[shreadvector]

https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/engines-motors-ive-got-a-better-one.147093/#post-1800938

Electric "motors" have moving parts your argument is in-valid.

 

[jlabrasca]

https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/engines-motors-ive-got-a-better-one.147093/#post-1800938

Motors have no moving parts to create the output. Engines have moving parts.
Motors: Electric motors, mass drivers, transverse linear motors, Solid Rocket Motor, etc.
Engines: Internal Combustion Engine, Gas Turbine Engine, Liquid Rocket Engine.

Electric motor output is the motion. Nothing had to move to create that output.

That's an interesting proposition. For the kinds of electric motors you can see with the naked eye charges must move. Else there would be no Lorentz force to move the rotor. Even if you disallow the conduction electrons in the windings as "parts", the motion of the rotor is not just the output of the motor, it is how the motor functions. For a simple DC motor, the commutator would seem to be a "moving part".

Also, and separately, Is a ramjet a motor or an engine? Do the moving parts required to bring fuel to the combustion chamber count?

 

[Nytrunner]

The confusion about 'fruit' and 'vegetable' arises because of the differences in usage between scientists and cooks. Scientifically speaking, a tomato is definitely a fruit: it develops from the ovary in the base of the flower, and contains the seeds of the plant. As far as cooking is concerned, some things which are strictly fruits ( such as tomatoes or bean pods ) are called 'vegetables' because they are used in savoury rather than sweet cooking.

Knowledge is being aware that tomatoes and cucumbers are fruits.

Wisdom is being aware that neither of them belong in a fruit salad.

 

[Bat-mite]

Knowledge is being aware that tomatoes and cucumbers are fruits.

Wisdom is being aware that neither of them belong in a fruit salad.

Winner!

 

[cerving]

Solid fuel rocket motors have moving parts too... the propellant. As Isaac says, nothing's gonna move unless something else moves too.

 

[shreadvector]

Solid fuel rocket motors have moving parts too... the propellant. As Isaac says, nothing's gonna move unless something else moves too.

https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/engines-motors-ive-got-a-better-one.147093/#post-1800938

Output work is the movement. No movement to create the output. Solid fuel motors do not have propellant and oxidizer moved by anything to mix them and react. They are sitting there, they start to burn and the output is the combustion byproduct gasses.

 

[boatgeek]

...
Motors have no moving parts to create the output. Engines have moving parts.
Motors: Electric motors, mass drivers, transverse linear motors, Solid Rocket Motor, etc.
Engines: Internal Combustion Engine, Gas Turbine Engine, Liquid Rocket Engine.

Electric motor output is the motion. Nothing had to move to create that output.
...

OK then, what about hydraulic motors? The hydraulic fluid moves to create the output, and there are definitely moving parts within the motor that are move somewhat independently of the core shaft, certainly more so than the winding of an electric motor.

 

[Nytrunner]

Like electric motors, I think of hydraulic motors as poorly described (much like estes "engines" )

Although an argument could be made that a Hydraulic motor is no more than a work input (from an engine) creating motion in the fluid

 

[shreadvector]

OK then, what about hydraulic motors? The hydraulic fluid moves to create the output, and there are definitely moving parts within the motor that are move somewhat independently of the core shaft, certainly more so than the winding of an electric motor.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_motor

Motors. Pressure makes the output shaft or linear piston move. Nothing had to move like in an internal combustion engine.

 

[jlabrasca]

https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/engines-motors-ive-got-a-better-one.147093/#post-1800938
Output work is the movement. No movement to create the output. Solid fuel motors do not have propellant and oxidizer moved by anything to mix them and react. They are sitting there, they start to burn and the output is the combustion byproduct gasses.

You keep linking back to your own post in the thread. I think this counts as a proof by repeated assertion fallacy.

Anyway, Hero's Engine - by way of NASA

https://history.msfc.nasa.gov/rocketry/02.html

 

[Nytrunner]

Crud, you're right, I was thinking of hydraulic pumps. Disregard!

 

[boatgeek]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_motor

Motors. Pressure makes the output shaft or linear piston move. Nothing had to move like in an internal combustion engine.

I'm really not getting your assertion here, especially once you look at the Wiki page you cite. There are moving parts in a hydraulic motor. On a vane motor at least, the vanes move relative to the center axle. Also, hydraulic fluid is moving through the motor to provide the pressure differential. How is this different from the moving parts within an internal combustion engine? For bonus points, do you define a Wankel engine as a motor? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wankel_engine

 

[adrian]

This question of motors vs. engines seems to be a regular feature here. Before that, it was a regular feature on the old newsgroup rec.models.rockets. They came up with a solution. What powers our rockets isn't a motor or an engine. It's a whoosh generator.