Don

Will 2" x 8" tongue and groove sheathing over log rafters spaced 4' apart support this much weight? I'm interested in building a house with straw bales for roof insulation and 6" of living turf on top (over a rubber membrane). Any structural engineers or knowledgeable carpenters out there? Thanks!

Will 2" x 8" tongue and groove sheathing over log rafters spaced 4' apart support this much weight? I'm interested in building a house with straw bales for roof insulation and 6" of living turf on top (over a rubber membrane). Any structural engineers or knowledgeable carpenters out there? Thanks!

I am interested in a very efficient method of turning a very high torque power source (a 12 r.p.m. floating waterwheel) into something that will turn a generator 1200 r.p.m. (a 1-100 ratio) Each waterwheel might produce 2/3 - 1 h.p. of turning force.

I think a good idea might involve using radial piston pumps like the ones shown here, as the pump on each waterwheel: http://www.boschrexroth.com/business_units/bri/en/...

and then pump a continuous loop of hydraulic fluid between the waterwheel, and a generator mounted safely onshore. I'd probably use vegetable oil as hydraulic fluid, to be most environmentally responsible.

And I wonder if a motor like this would work to turn the generator:

http://www.boschrexroth.com/business_units/bri/en/...

I see these devices come in different sizes. What size do I need for this 1 h.p. application, and how do I attain the relationship of 1 turn of the waterwheel equaling 100 turns of the generator?

I've tried to ask my hydraulic shop these questions, but they only seem to repair equipment, and they don't seem to know these answers. I'd like to know a little bit more before I try another hydraulic shop for advice, so I don't look so dumb. If you could help me out in my pursuit of knowledge here, I think this idea could be very useful in many locations as a new energy source. I'm willing to give this idea to the public domain, I don't think it could be patented anyway, and I hereby disclose this to be public domain information from here on out, anyway!

In addition to the size and ratio information needed, If this is a good idea, also please tell me, and if this idea is tragically flawed somehow, please tell me that also. I'm currently using a 1-100 gear increaser, and they use 4 internal gears and produce a LOT of friction losses. I'm hoping to gain higher efficiency, and eliminate the necessity of trailing wires to the waterwheel itself, plus I think a loop of vegetable oil would be a safer environmental risk. Thank you, engineers and knowledgeable designers!

I'm sure a jet engine is more powerful, but which engine would move 1000 pounds of freight from point A to point B using the least amount of fuel.

I used to know some old guys that gathered night crawlers using electric prods at night. Their electric prods were plugged into the outlets outside a public school building, and involved running just one wire (not 2! not 3!) from the outlet to the prods - the moist earth provided the ground, and the worms came crawling up. (Sometimes if you grabbed one too close to the prod, you could feel a little tingle through the worm.)

These guys were getting worms from public school yards, because those yards had the nicest lawns, and the most worms. I told these guys they were stealing electricity from the taxpayers by doing this. They told me that since they were only running one wire, and not using the electrical ground/neutral in the meter, that the school wasn't being charged for the electricity, either.

I realize this sounds unethical, because obviously the power company still has to generate the power, but were these guys right? Did the meter really not read that current?

Thanks for your answers!

Someone asked about Pit-less Cherries recently, and I answered them. I'm a master gardener, ok, from a long ways back, but I answered them. It was kind of a flip answer, perhaps, but I thought it was true.

Well, this question and answer keeps showing up now as one of yahoo's best answers, and I'm ok with that. However, I didn't know people could still give a thumbs up or a thumbs down on this story. I'm noticing a ratio of about 3 thumbs up for every 1 thumb down.

Well, that's maybe a good endorsement, but I wonder why so many people give this a thumbs down instead. (I'd like everybody to be happy!)

So my question is, does the world already have a pitless cherry, or why are some (a minority of) people giving this answer a thumbs down? The original answer is pasted here:

"Best Answer - Chosen by Asker

I think cherry growers are waiting for the right tree to come along that throws off this sort of fruit as a genetic fluke, so they can then start reproducing those trees.

So far, this tree hasn't popped up to show itself, so plant breeders could then properly take advantage of this new quirk. It might be here now, and nobody has brought it to the proper attention, or maybe it will never be here. We're not sure, but we're still waiting."

Thanks for your help, everyone.

p.s. I can take it if I'm wrong!

Hi, I've been answering questions on Yahoo Answers only a week or two. I know there's no money or value to the "point" system, but I think I'm seeing a way to artificially boost my score anyway. Matter of fact, I used this system today to raise my accuracy rate from 10% (probably pretty good considering I only registered Oct. 28) to 14% - yes, in one day.

It's so easy, it seems like there much be some sort of "glitch" in the system here. Indeed, I'm afraid to tell you, for fear you'll cancel my account now, or my points, or something. It hasn't affected my sleep yet, but it might!

OK, this is Don's System for raising your points:

Apparently only some Askers really rate their answers, giving them 10 points if it's the best one. The rest go to voting. I'm noticing that many questions never seem to get voted on, and one vote alone is enough to "swing" the election. By going through my own questions that I've asked and going all the way to the beginning, I went through all of my 2 week old questions that were listed as "in voting", and gave all my answers a vote. You don't show people's icons or names there, but it's not hard to recognize my own answers. I like them anyway, I gave them all a vote. Apparently, that's all Yahoo's system is waiting for, because when I went to my email, here's everything I just voted for, giving me 10 points each.

Is this cheating anybody (except myself)? Why does Yahoo let me vote on my own questions, when they should know that as a typical too-smart-for-his-own-good human I'm going to be driven by my own greedy self interests here?

OK, I look forward to your responses. This is my very first question!

Don