S k a t e L o g F o r u m
Inline Skating and Quad Roller Skating
Forum Hosts: Jessica Wright | Kathie Fry
FOLLOW US: Our Blog | Facebook | Twitter | Email
|Home - Forum Index - Africa Skating - Asia Skating - Europe Skating - Oceania Skating - Pan America Skating - Roller_Rinks - -|
Forum Administrators: Jessica Wright and Kathie Fry | Email Us
Access code for buying and selling subforums: "skates"
How To Get a User Account and Posting Privileges in the SkateLog Forum
Use Google to Search the SkateLog Forum
|Speed Skating Forum Most of the discussions in this forum will be about inline speed skating but discussions about ice speed skating and quad roller speed skating are also welcome.|
||Thread Tools||Display Modes|
|March 28th, 2017, 11:49 AM||#61|
Join Date: Mar 2016
Putting a bearing at your 100% efficiency "four-dimensional wall that can not be crossed" looks like an absolute statement.
"Four-dimensional wall that can not be crossed"
It is the standard by which the performance difference is distinguished on the basis of this line.
There is no absolute one.
It may differ in the final process.
Then your chart should label that way, otherwise a 100% efficient bearing would have zero measurable resistance. Now it's being said that the "New Design System" bearing that is labeled at 100% efficiency is a relative measurement? (Which I hope it is anyway, because no mechanical bearing has 100% efficiency, which is what puts that whole graph in to question to begin with.)
It is a condition that has nothing to do with "measurable resistance" you are thinking.
Regardless of resistance, there is a correlation with acceleration force.
The technology of the race way polishing is the almost same.
With no discrimination technology, you can not make a difference.
And how was that measured in this test? I think that's the question being asked here.
We respect the opinions of our collaboration company.
We are not trying to rob the technical know-how.
We tested it to check performance data.
The results of the test and the performance are compared and checked.
We are not disparage the technology of the collaboration company.
That's the point some of us are trying to not only make, but get information on. Without information on the testing methods this is not information, it's propaganda.
There is no place for any company to provide fact data on the bearing function.
Just there is publicity that the bearing is good.
Our collaboration company(J&T) presented objective data.
Believe it or not, it is consumer's choice.
"Point some of us are trying to not only make"
When exposing technology, they try to produce with that technology.
We hate to hurt collaboration companies.
Why not disclose technology?
Any other company that had agreements with the J&T tried to extort the technology.
No one asked you how the bearings are made, we asked you how they were tested. If MPC or Coca-Cola presents comparative information between their product and competition, yes, they can be expected to explain the testing procedure. If used as advertisement, they could be required to.
"We asked you how they were tested"
If curious, you test directly.
If you contact below, you can receive samples.
You test it directly.
Wear the bearing that you are using for one foot.
Wear test sample bearings on the other foot.
And compare the two different performances directly.
Constant speed running does not make much sense.
You can discover the difference in acceleration function(interval).
Try to Instantaneously accelerate.
Like automotive 0 to 100.
Danville user's say.
“This bearings are Drug inhaled.”
It will be an exaggerated expression.
However, they know that performance is discriminated against other bearings.
please understand, English even poor.
|March 30th, 2017, 09:58 PM||#62|
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Saint Petersburg, Russia
I don't believe that man can feel the difference between bearings of same class (swiss/"chinese") if lubrication is the same.
I think good bearings are useless until you use press to put bearings into wheels since when I press my bearings into wheels by hand I often see one side of outer ring like 0.1-0.2 mm (measured with my eye) higher than another, I think all bearing qualities are useless if they are pressed like that.
|April 1st, 2017, 05:52 PM||#63|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa
Hi NDS !
(background) In June of 2017 I will have been a practicing mechanical engineer for 37 years. In that time I've done some (but not much) design work with bearings of various types.
In my experience in general (and applying here to bearings) there is Data, Craft, and Art.
"Data" is hard fact that is demonstrateable, reproduceable, quantifiable. The concept of efficiency in its purest sense is hard data. Power out divided by power in is "efficiency". Pure science and just numbers. No opinions! In my business, multi-million dollar decisions are preceded by "Show me the data."
"Craft" is a combination of hard data and anecdotal evidence used in combination to arrive at informed but perhaps not absolutely proveable conclusions. Here there may be less data and more anecdotal evidence, which means care must be taken to not compare things that are not really comparable. (here in USA we use expression "comparing apples to oranges" to describe a comparison that is not appropriate). Applying "Craft" well requires a lot of technical depth and insight.
"Art" in my opinion is nothing more than a beauty pagent. Purely subjective opinion and personal bias are used to assign completly arbitrary relative value to characteristics which may or may not have any importance to product perfomance. Reading a product material specification off of a manufacturer's datasheet and and using it to affect an "efficiency assignment" is nothing more than a beauty contest.
So... with respect... I (and I think matguy and others... I cannot speak for them, but suspect I'm on target) feel you are bringing a lot of Art, some Craft... but little DATA to your bearing efficiency discussion.
Quando omni flunkus, moritati
|Today, 01:17 AM||#64|
Senior Poser - Vote 4 Me!
Join Date: Jun 2014
Intellectual Property rights in China.
I've worked in manufacturing sales for many years now, and am now making a mid-life career change into engineering. I'm also an amateur Sinophile (student/aficionado of Chinese language and culture). Based on the experiences I've learned from all three of these different angles, I bring a, perhaps, somewhat unique perspective to this. Also, I have several philosophical objections to IP in general, but it is a part of the world we live in. So the rest of my response here will be worded from a pro-IP perspective, even though that's not my own personal perspective.
Safety concerns aside: For all the complaints about IP in China, most people would be shocked to find out that patents/copyrights/trademarks/etc are very well enforced in China...
if, and only if, the person/company goes to the extra trouble/expense of making the appropriate IP filings >in China<.
Most IP lawsuits brought by foreign people/companies that only have US/EU/Int'l IP filings lose their cases in Chinese courts. Most IP lawsuits brought by foreign people/companies that have US/EU/Int'l and Chinese IP filings -win- their cases in Chinese courts.
I'm over simplifying a bit (but not by much) but put succinctly: If you manufacture and care about protecting your IP, duplicate your IP filings in China.
Even if you don't manufacture in China, file in China - the Chinese knock-off artists attend all the major int'l trade shows armed with cameras - and sometimes will even blatantly take measurements/dimensions out in the open!
"Can't make eggs without bacon, or something like that." - Sidewinder 2014/02/20
Custom wheels by AussieScott: www.coreyskates.com