Friction Weight=(D-U)/2

[Bill Ballard]

At 11:45 AM -0500 12/13/99, David C. Stanwood wrote:
>Fri, 10 Dec 1999 "Richard Moody" <remoody@easnet.net> Wrote:
>>Why have to mentally divide that by
>>two and remember that also? So would it be wrong to say? "since FW of 10
>>is acceptible, then a diff of DW and UW of 20 is acceptable but getting up
>>there."

Absolutely no problm, if all you're looking for is a measure of friction.
Fortunately, the complementary figure provided by the same averaging of DW
and UW, Balance Weight, is not affected by such a decision. The ability to
separate friction BW is the gateway to an powerful system of action
analysis.

BTW, friction is not a weight, it's a force. Weight is an expression of the
gravitational attraction of clumps of mass relative to the nearest largest
clump, in our case Mother Earth. There are physicists and engineers on this
list, and they would be happy to see the terms Force and Weight properly
used.

>In defense of these terms I have to take exception with the comments by
>Mark Abbott Stern in his December 1999 Journal Article "Touchweight &
>Friction"

Mr. Stern probably arrived at his position without the beneifit of a
variable friction hammershank, which cleraly shows DW and UW radiating
outwards from a central point as friction increases. Maybe David can send
him one.

Bill Ballard, RPT
New Hampshire Chapter, PTG

"I go, two plus like, three is pretty much totally five. Whatever"
    ...........The new math