When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I call them super nuts, but whatever. Far easier way to get proper stretch out of a large dia bolt than torquing it to some unhuman ftlbs.
(Nord-Lock.jpg)
GBU-10's/12's/24's/27's etc use a collar to adapt the bomb body to the guidance unit. The collar is attached with a nut torqued to 600 ft*lbs. On an F-15E, when loaded on the forward pylons/racks on the conformal fuel tank (lower outside of intakes), these collars have a tendency to unscrew themselves. Some weird airflow causes enough torque on the larger GBU-24 fins or something.
So, for that application, they use the superbolt method. Four bolts torqued to 600 in*lbs does the trick.
I first saw those torque wrenches watching one of my favorite youtube channels, Agent JayZ. If im mot mistaken they use them for the main shaft in LM1500/2500 and other industrial/aero gas turbines. Im guessing the aero derivative wouldn't allow for a superbolt, or something. Iirc in one of his videos, they had to loosen a main shaft, which was originally torqued to 4 figures. With time and corrosion, etc it took everything that one of those units had to break it loose. Ive also seen them used on the turret drive mechanism of those gigantic mining buckets.
I'm honestly curious to see how Ryzen compares to Kaby Lake.
AMD has been losing pretty hard in recent years, having not achieved parity with Intel in terms of MIPS/watt and MIPS/Mhz since the '486 era, and fully abandoning their advantage in MIPS/$ in recent years.
I predict that they'll come closer than in recent history, but will, as usual, be limited by thermal performance in the real world, as their published TDP/Ghz numbers are still lacking, and history suggests that AMD will not leap-frog Intel in terms of pipeline / instruction-processor efficiency. I further predict that fanboys will spend hilariously large amounts of money on exotic cooling solutions to push the performance of the highest-end Ryzens to well beyond anything achievable by an Intel processor using the OEM heatsink / fan.
This was a pretty good processor. I replaced my 486DX-66 with one:
I'm honestly curious to see how Ryzen compares to Kaby Lake.
If you missed some of the YT videos already posted. Apparently Ryzen beats kaby lake 7700k with some substantial gains per AMD's claims.
Some demos were shown as well. Finishing about 10seconds faster on a small file in cinebench, which would equal a much greater yield on a larger file. Ryzen means business.
Given the fact, it does have 4 more physical cores, and 4 additional threads. I'm surprised they were able to keep the TDP modest.
It sort of reminds me of AMD's Bulldozer approach.
Biggest factor out of everything though is the price. The highest end intel is over $1,000 while they're pricing the 1800X at $499 for similar or slightly better results.
The Core i7-7700K is a $339 – $350 CPU. The Core i7-6800K is a $434 – $441 CPU. And, of course, the Core i7-6900K is a $1000 CPU. Between the increased performance from additional cores and the dramatic price reduction (relative to Intel) for an eight-core part, AMD is obviously gunning for bear.
02-22-2017, 09:34 AM
0
