Cutting through hardened steel with muscle power

AI Thread Summary
A reasonably built human can cut through hardened steel using a diamond blade, but muscle power alone is insufficient without the right tools. Tools like a Morse 8% cobalt hacksaw blade can effectively cut through tough materials like 4130 chrome-moly steel. The discussion emphasizes the importance of using appropriate cutting tools rather than relying solely on human strength. With the right equipment, cutting through hardened steel becomes manageable. Overall, proper tools are essential for successfully abrading hardened steel.
Lightspeed5
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Would it be possible for a reasonably built human to abrade through hardened steel if he had a blade made out of diamond? Or is human muscle power insufficient to break the chemical bonds?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
My Morse 8% cobalt hacksaw blade goes thru 4130 chrome-moly steel like a knife through hot butter. :biggrin:

Respectfully yours,
Steve
 
As stated above, with the appropriate tool (a good hacksaw), it isn't all that difficult.
 
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top