Re: The Nanogirl News~

From: Adrian Tymes (wingcat@pacbell.net)
Date: Mon May 12 2003 - 18:55:03 MDT

  • Next message: Harvey Newstrom: "RE: Eating glycotoxins"

    --- Party of Citizens <citizens@vcn.bc.ca> wrote:
    > We are told so often about how strong ants are.

    *Relative* strength. Problem is, all those
    comparisons
    assume that weight and strength, or volume and
    strength,
    go up at the same rate. They don't. Weight and
    volume go up cubed, while strength (which relies on
    cross-sectional area) goes up squared.

    > Here
    > is a problem for
    > nanotechnologists:
    >
    > How many ants, harnessed by carbon nanofibres would
    > it take to make the
    > equivalent of one horse power?

    Well, let's see...

    Start with a 3 milligram ant - about typical for a
    leafcutter, which is commonly shown lifting much
    larger leaves. Ants can lift 10 to 50 times their
    weight; being generous, let's say these ants were
    selected from the high side of that, and can thus
    lift .15 grams each. And let's also say the ant would
    need exactly 1 second to lift this weight.

    So, an ant could generate .15 g * 1 G - or about .0015
    newtons - per second, which is .0015 watts - or about
    .000002 horsepower. Inverting that, you'd need about
    500,000 ants to generate one horsepower, assuming
    perfect conversion of lifting power to whatever output
    form (electricity, rotary motion) you desire. In
    reality, conversion losses would multiply that.

    When you consider the volume needed to store, harness,
    feed, motivate, et al that many ants, it might be more
    efficient - to say nothing of far cheaper - to get
    that 1 horsepower from a horse.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon May 12 2003 - 19:06:12 MDT