2008.08.27 07:36 The Latin Language
2024.05.15 15:23 Cold-Catch3585 How to solve
2024.05.15 12:49 SporksOrDie Xfinity is profiting off law enforement privacy violations
2024.05.15 02:40 ShiftYourReality How to Escape the Confines of Time and Space According to the CIA (The Gateway Experience)
2024.05.14 23:22 Jakeultron308 Charon reflects the Nataku Bomb calc
Fire Force Episode 17, Charon Reflects some type of bomb or energy that splits clouds and im surprised nobody calced this at all so i thought it'd be fun to do it myself. submitted by Jakeultron308 to FeatCalcing [link] [comments] Clip/Scan 1 As the Clip Above shows everything. but ill only be calcing the Speed, Cloud vaporization and Charon's durability from the explosion below. Because those are the necessary Things to calc here. Scan 2 The clouds here look like cumulus (they look flat) but the cloud type isn't really going to matter that much since the whole Cloud wasn't even close to being Vaporized. Low Cloud Altitude = 2000m/2km 2xTan(70Deg/2)xDistance from POVxObject or anything Size in Pixels/Panel or Frame Height in Pixels (result is diameter in m) 2xTan(70Deg/2)x2000x229/809 = 792.81842398 Diameter: = 792.81842398m Radius: = 396.409212m Height: 172px/595.479340282m Were gonna use the cylinder volume Volume: 293970700.9364m^3 Mass of cumulonimbus Liquid Water Content (g/m3) = 1-3 1 KG/M^3 = 0.001 G/CM^3 or 3000kg m^3 Affected Cloud mass: 8.819121028e+11 KG latent heat of vaporization for water = 2264705 J/kg Energy output: 1.9972707e+18 Joules/ 477.35915392 Megatons of TNT or Mountain level+ now its time to calc the speed then The explosion calc. The Beam decreased its size to that of a mere bullet and travel from ground level to the moons surface in 495 frames Fire force (or atleast the video from youtube in stats for nerds) is in 30FPS 495/30 = 16.5 seconds. now for the distance Scan 3 (Source: Royal Museums Greenwich) From the clip, the Moon looks like its Perigee but we'll calc both distances while also adding the distance of a Low altitude satellite (past the earth's thermosphere) onto the moon distance with the Time (Time/Distance) Distance: 363,271 KM (perigee) Speed: 22016424.2 M/S (Sub-Relativistic++) Distance 2: 405,863 KM (apogee) Speed 2: 24597757.6 M/S (Sub-Relativistic++) Final Speed result: (Sub-Relativistic++) Scan 4 Green line: 77px/29.29773947m (Proof) 0.380490123 m/px Cyan line: 164px/62.40038017m Explosion diameter: 62.40038017m Explosion Radius: 31.20019008m W = R^3x((27136xP+8649)^(1/2)/13568-93/13568)^2 where W is the yield in tons of TNT, R is the radius in meters, and P is the shockwave pressure in bars, where we generally use 1.37895 bars or 20 psi of pressure. For this specific formula, there is no need to divide the result by 2. 31.20019008^3x((27136x1.37895+8649)^(1/2)/13568-93/13568)^2 = 2.44094073379 2.44094073379 Tons of TNT/Large Building level+ Conclusion: The feat is Mountain level+/477.35915392 Megatons of TNT And Charon Has Large Building level+ durability (Far higher since this is Season 1) and attack speed of Sub-Relativistic++. |
2024.05.14 13:25 Zamerel How to find the most efficient ratios of variables in stereometry?
2024.05.14 09:45 Vaeringh Air or broken seal in the brake master cylinder?
Hi, submitted by Vaeringh to MechanicAdvice [link] [comments] I just figured that I'd go through with changing the brake fluid on my Saab 9-3 1.8i (Z18XE, 2007) for the first time ever, as far as I know -that means at least five years. The fluid came back ok on my tester, below 1% water content, but still, it's most likely way overdue. So, I did both vacuum pump together with someone pushing the brake pedal, as well as just the brake pedal (which I preferred as you didn't get any phantom air sucked in at the nipple), and did it in the right order and volume four or five times in total. However, during the first of those times, I wrecked one bleed screw as I got fooled by how tight it was (probably just due to rust) and foolishly tightened it with the same leverage, and had to change the entire caliper, followed by four new bleeding procedures. The last two with the ignition on (not engine running), because I read on the Saab forums that that'd allow one to get air out of the ABS as well (found no other source for that, and nothing about it in the WIS). The only problem is that when I wrecked the bleed screw, of course fluid leaked out. In the end, the reservoir ran empty. No idea if the master cylinder also got empty, but that doesn't seem unlikely... But actually, I always had the reservoir cap on when the leakage happened, and IIRC there wasn't that much leakage, only when the pedal was depressed, so perhaps it never got that far since the atmosphere couldn't gravity bleed the brake line with the cap on? Now, no bubbles are coming out anymore, and I still feel that the pedal is rock solid with the engine off. Turning the engine on, it sinks of course, and gives some resistance but if you just keep pressure on it, it slowly sinks down, probably all the way. After the brakes have stopped the car, you can also easily push the pedal a bit further and then slowly the rest of the way, as demonstrated in the video. I've read that Saabs with turbo usually have a vacuum pump which makes the servo very powerful, and then it might be normal with a pedal sinking far when stopped, but I don't recognize this behavior at all, so I'm pretty sure this is out of the ordinary. The brake certainly still stops the car however. I haven't driven at high speeds, but I tried speeding up very briefly on the lawn to let's say 10 km/h (6 mph) and braking and it stops fine. The brakes bite with just light toe pressure, but after that I can easily push the pedal quite a bit further and then slowly even further. I heard that you might wreck the seals in the master cylinder by pushing the brake pedal too far while bleeding. That might definitely have happened, I have pushed it pretty far while not bleeding as well. So this problem is likely either an internal leak or air trapped in the master cylinder, right? Is it possible to tell which? The brake pedal wouldn't get back up if it was a stuck caliper etc. right? What should I do, just siphon out as much liquid as I can from the reservoir, put a catch can underneath and unhook the hoses from the master cylinder, put some hoses up to the reservoir and do a bench bleed while it's still in there? Or, this is a very lazy method I haven't seen anywhere else, but Scotty Kilmer just loosens the brake lines from the master cylinder a bit and then just apparently gets the air out with no hose routing needed, just basically the same principle as bleeding the calipers by pushing the pedal, but now pretending that the brake hoses are bleeding nipples: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uz4OwuUGVOA https://reddit.com/link/1crmjz5/video/ofxd5cuuic0d1/player |
2024.05.14 03:34 MoriartyMoose What can be done to deal with volume changes between apps?
2024.05.13 23:24 Grouchy_Carpenter489 Oracle Fusion Cloud ERP: It is time to forget about standard Excel sheets and take an enhanced data upload tool
A Time to Forget About Ordinary Excel Sheets and Take an Enhanced Data Upload Tool submitted by Grouchy_Carpenter489 to u/Grouchy_Carpenter489 [link] [comments] Thousands of users worldwide of Oracle Fusion ERP use ADFdi and FBDI for data loading or data management generally. Excel has some great features that help to streamline data analysis. There is no argument that Excel is a highly functional tool for organizational data management. Ordinary Microsoft Excel spreadsheets have many limitations regarding data loading to Oracle Fusion Cloud. Excel is great for simple ad hoc calculations, but it needs connectivity features to automate and document its contents, making its use prone to error. Manually keying in data in Oracle Cloud from Excel worksheets or copy-pasting is a slow, time-consuming process that is bound to reduce employee productivity. Accuracy is also compromised, and inaccurate data can cost an organization millions in revenue. Excel needs more automation, so if you handle large volumes of data, there may be a better tool for you. Furthermore, data security is not assured since Excel does not have encryption features. The standard Oracle tools (ADFdi and FBDI) are rigid in nature; the user cannot move columns around or even easily paste data from another sheet to ADFdi or FBDI. The error reporting and resolution cycle is too cumbersome and needs specialized technical knowledge. Why do people still use Excel sheets for data management? ● It’s cheaper For a team that doesn't care about automation, why bother spending on something more costly if they can get away with something that stores data tables? Considering its limitations, is it worth it in the long-run cost? ● Easy-to-use Excel is easy to use. It is one of the basic Microsoft Office tools that most people learn to use in basic computer interactions. Because they are already familiar with it, most people find Excel easy to use and often prefer to do so than learn new about new tools. ● Limited knowledge of what’s available Some people are just stuck in their routines. They need help staying current on the newest software available on the market. If the leadership of a team or members does not take the initiative to look around and find out what the market has to offer, they will be stuck with Excel and its attendant costs when others are enjoying the benefits of more advanced tools. ● Poor experience with some project management software Choosing a data loading tool to suit your data loading needs is a task that should be taken seriously. Many data-loading teams that used Excel have been turned off by their previous experience with data-loading tools. Some tools are cumbersome and difficult to use, others are code intensive and not suitable for most end users, and some may need more features you are looking for. The poor experience is a result of poor customization. Suppose you had a tool that allowed you to use the easy-to-use and familiar Excel worksheet while providing you with advanced specialized features for loading data into the cloud. Wouldn’t that be great? How to make Excel work with advanced tools Working with Excel in data loading does not have to be a slow and cumbersome process that does not ensure the accuracy or security of your data. You can harness the power of Excel and still enjoy using advanced data-loading tools. More4Apps and Simplified Loader are Excel-based data-loading to consider. More4Apps More4Apps is an Excel-based data-loading tool that allows businesses to integrate familiar Excel spreadsheets with Oracle EBS and Oracle Fusion. Its tools work within the familiar interface of Microsoft Excel, leveraging the many features of Excel to facilitate data loading. Training is optional since Excel is the main interface, and end-users are familiar with it. Unlike ordinary Excel spreadsheets, which are limited in scalability, More4Apps empowers data owners to carry out mass data uploads and updates. A plugin must be installed on a PC before you can use More4Apps. The IT Helpdesk needs to be involved in installing the plugin, so only specific PCs can be used. More4Apps sends and receives data from the server hosted by More4Apps. Considering data security, allowing data transfers to a third-party server without ensuring the details are transferred is risky. Robust testing is required with every release of More4Apps update to ensure your data is transferred to a safe place. The IT Security department needs to get involved in verifying the third-party server and plugin. Simplified Loader ~Simplified Loader~ is an Excel-based tool designed explicitly for uploading or downloading data to and from Oracle Fusion Cloud. The Simplified Loader template is easy to use. It includes a toolbar that contains operations specific to the template. The output of any operation is displayed in the Excel template's Load Status and Error Message fields. Simplified Loader Excel files upload or download data from Oracle Fusion Cloud. Simplified Loader’s Excel templates are used either for mass data loads, for example, data migration, or everyday data loading activities in Oracle Cloud. Simplified Loader ensures your data’s security by routing data from the Excel template directly to Oracle Cloud without a third-party server. The Simplified Loader template doesn’t need plugin installation and runs using Macros, similar to how other Oracle Cloud tools interact with Oracle. Which template should you choose? User convenience - Both More4Apps and Simplified Loader provide features that enhance user experience. Most UX features are similar in both products. Since they use Microsoft Excel, additional training is rarely necessary. More4Apps provides a form to input data that is not in the tabular format. Whereas the Simplified Loader provides a single unified sheet to enter data, the same sheet is used to invoke the list of values. Both tools allow you to insert custom columns, hide or delete columns you don't need, and insert formulas you may need for data analysis. You can also analyze or validate data before uploading it. Data Security - Oracle Fusion only allows interaction through APIs. Both More4Apps and Simplified Loader use APIs to interact with Oracle, so the security protocols are the same in both toolsets. More4Apps uses an external system to manage licenses. From the IT point of view, in a highly data-sensitive environment, the IT has to open additional ports to interact with the More4Apps servers to validate licenses. In terms of data security, both toolsets have the same features. License Management - This topic is considerably different in More4Apps and Simplified Loader. More4Apps restricts the number of times an administrator can update users licensed to use the Simplified Loader template, whereas, in Simplified Loader, the Administrator has full control over maintaining the users licensed to use the Simplified Loader templates. Support—Both organizations offer excellent support to users who log defects using the support system. Simplified Loader has a vast library of short videos demonstrating product features and functionalities. More4Apps has recently adopted the approach of video tutorials. Plugin installation - This is a key difference between the two templates. The More4Apps template requires an additional plugin installed on the user's machine. The user will always see an additional toolbar in Excel when working on any Excel document. The user always has to use the PC where the plugin is installed. In comparison, the Simplified Loader Excel doesn’t need any plugin installation on the user’s machine. When the user opens the Simplified Loader file, the Simplified Loader toolbar appears. Users won’t see the additional toolbar when they open any other Excel file. Using Excel parallelly: When using either toolset, Excel cannot be used for any other purposes. The user has to wait until the data is loaded to Oracle. Pricing: Both toolsets offer per-user licensing. More4Apps offers licenses per user by module, whereas Simplified Loader offers licenses per user by Template. License management at the template level gives the administrator higher control to assign the right user to the right template, resulting in purchasing the right number of licenses per user. The More4Apps licenses are considerably higher (more than 5x) than the Simplified Loader licenses. Conclusion Using ordinary Excel spreadsheets for data loading may not be very effective. Excel may have shortcomings, but you can use it efficiently with advanced data-loading tools to get the best of both applications. Both More4Apps and Simplified Loader provide similar features for loading data in Oracle. Both are advanced data-loading tools that make your experience more pleasant and effective. Simplified Loader is more handy as it does not need plugin installation, and the user doesn’t need any involvement from IT to install the plug-in. |
2024.05.13 20:09 DeadInside1o1 Tracking the location from a sequence of 3D locations obtained from Positron Emission Tomography data.
Hey All! submitted by DeadInside1o1 to learnmachinelearning [link] [comments] I'm working on a rather complex problem and have been for a considerable amount of time. A year more or less. The data that I'm working with comes from a rather simple simulator that generates pairs of points on a cylinders wall (excluding the top and bottom). The pair of points defined by 2 3D locations that make up what we call a line-of-response (LOR) in the land of medical imaging. These lines intersect a very small volume (dependant of the particle that is placed in the PET scanner). Now there are algorithms out there that can find the location of these lines but I'm trying to build a neural network that can do this. The current start of the art method is using PEPT-ML (unsupervised machine learning). It does this by separating the total number of LORs into chunks of some size we can call N. It then computes the smallest connecting line. If this line is less than some user defined constant, we can call this MD (maximum distance), the centroid of this connecting line is then saved. These centroids are then passed into HDBSCAN which then computes clusters with the help of another parameter called TF (true_fraction) which is the ratio of inliers to outliers. You can then easily remove the noise that HDBSCAN identified and compute the mean of the remaining points in the cluster to find the location. What I'm trying to do is remove the hassle of having to deal with and optimise all these hyperparameters. I've decided to create a neural network that can find the location within a sample. So I've tried many approaches such as a FFN, transformer encoder and lastly is the recurrent networks. The current network architecture is displayed below and currently provided the best minimum L2 loss . The network hyperparameters are input_dim = 6 (The 2 3D interaction locations), output_dim = 3 (the output location), num_layers = 4 (any larger doesn't work), hidden_dim = 256 (again any larger doesn't work). class TransformerEncoder(nn.Module): def __init__(self, input_dim, output_dim, num_layers, nhead, hidden_dim): super(TransformerEncoder, self).__init__() self.rnn = nn.LSTM(input_size = input_dim, hidden_size = hidden_dim, num_layers = num_layers, batch_first = True, dropout = 0.1, bidirectional = False, ) self.hidden_dim = hidden_dim self.fc1 = nn.Linear(hidden_dim, output_dim) self.tanh = nn.Tanh() def forward(self, x): x, _ = self.rnn(x) x = x[:, -1, :].view(-1, 1, self.hidden_dim) x = self.fc1(x) x = self.tanh(x) return xThe batch size being used is 1024 if that's relevant? Larger batch sizes tend to train a lot slower and with the amount of training data (1_000_000) and validation data (100_000) it already takes some time. I'd prefer if it doesn't take any longer to train. I have uploaded the training and validation data to onedrive if anyone want's to have a look. Here is the link. Anyone should be able to get the data if they so wish. You should also find the script that is used for training. The preprocessing of the data was performed by scaling the (x1, y1, z1, x2, y2, z2) between -1 and 1. This was applied to all pairs of interactions/LORs. It should be noted that The (N, M, 6) array was converted to a (2*N*M, 3) array first and then the scaling was applied and afterwards was converted back to a (N, M, 6) array. N denotes the amount of different samples of LORs, M denotes the number of sequences. This was done so that the targets can be scaled as well. Also this allows for unscaling of predictions during testing. The scaling step is shown here: N = 1_000_000 trainInputs = np.load(trainInputPath)[0:N] trainTargets = np.load(trainTargetPath)[0:N] print("Done loading in training data ...\n") # load test input and target data print("Load in test data ...") N = 100_000 testInputs = np.load(testInputPath)[0:N] testTargets = np.load(testTargetPath)[0:N] print("Done loading in test data ...\n") # transform data print("transforming data ...") inputScaler1 = MinMaxScaler(feature_range = (-1, 1)) train_inputs_scaled = inputScaler1.fit_transform(trainInputs.reshape(-1, 3)) train_inputs_scaled = train_inputs_scaled.reshape(-1, 100, 6) test_inputs_scaled = inputScaler1.transform(testInputs.reshape(-1, 3)) test_inputs_scaled = test_inputs_scaled.reshape(-1, 100, 6) train_targets_scaled = inputScaler1.transform(trainTargets.reshape(-1, 3)) train_targets_scaled = train_targets_scaled.reshape(-1, 1, 3) test_targets_scaled = inputScaler1.transform(testTargets.reshape(-1, 3)) test_targets_scaled = test_targets_scaled.reshape(-1, 1, 3) print("Done transforming data ...\n")The loss looks as follows. Weird spikes. No idea what causes that. Also no idea why the validation loss is lower than the training loss. I don't think that's an issue? https://preview.redd.it/zejyaj73i80d1.png?width=1500&format=png&auto=webp&s=a13657a53b0e5f6175994d556f5f44279c6d3b55 The issue with this approach is that although the validation loss is considerably small it is still not good enough. A good way of thinking about this loss is that 0.1 loss is more or less equal to 10k mm error. 0.01 loss = 1k mm error. 0.001 loss = 100 mm error. 1e-4 loss = 10 mm error and so on. I think I need a loss of 10^(-8) or something. The complete training script is also in the Onedrive link as mentioned before. Here's an example of tracking versus the PEPT-ML tracker. The PEPT-ML tracker is significantly more smooth and stable. https://preview.redd.it/g3spwvw5i80d1.png?width=1920&format=png&auto=webp&s=515800267a7b508f3632dd4fc37aab9d83703980 Each of the scatter points are from the neural network being used to output a location from the sequence of LORs. It's really odd that the Z dimension is perfectly fine and more than acceptable but X and Y are well not great. I know there's a symmetry in X and Y but would that cause an issue? The geometry of the cylinder is shown below. https://preview.redd.it/4qszacy6i80d1.png?width=2063&format=png&auto=webp&s=fe59b6c22795db934819f0fbf43df42f6fc6fee6 Any help is greatly appreciated! |
2024.05.13 20:08 DirtyWaterDaddyMack Talking Shop - Sludge Volume Index
If you recognize this format, yes it’s me – let’s keep the personal identifiers to a minimum please. submitted by DirtyWaterDaddyMack to Wastewater [link] [comments] TODAY’S TOPIC: ~SVI~ Sit back and relax with your favorite sample jug and let’s chat about SVI. The last couple messages have been in relation to settling where we discussed Stokes’ Law, bulking vs. rising sludge, and clarifier parameters. We usually don’t sit around punching numbers on our abacuses (that’s not a thing anyway) to figure out our DT or SLR every hour of the day. On our rounds, we’re hopefully not seeing the extremes of bulking sludge or rising sludge either. What I’m trying to get at is more along the lines of how we fine tune our well-running process when things slightly change… Enter in the Sludge Volume Index (SVI). The secret in remembering what SVI really represents is in the word INDEX. Just as a person’s BMI is an index, our index will measure our settleability in relation to our MLSS concentration. Refresh on the settleometer:
https://preview.redd.it/g8irvggnf80d1.png?width=624&format=png&auto=webp&s=9ff9fc583e9856298cd10ab31091e80841d03831 Back to “Plant A” and “Plant B” – let’s say they both fall into the “just right” settling observation, just with different final SSV30 values (200 vs. 300). To help make a judgement, you’ll need to factor in MLSS to calculate the SVI. If “Plant A” has an MLSS of 2,000 ppm and “Plant B” has 3,000 ppm, it turns out they both have the same SVI and are probably running pretty well. The formula for SVI is: SVI = (SSV30) * 1,000 ÷ MLSS Take a look at this Sludge Volume Index sheet for some explanations on how SVI works. “Plant A” SVI = 200 * 1,000 ÷ 2,000 = 100 “Plant B” SVI = 300 * 1,000 ÷ 3,000 = 100 The perfect world SVI = 100. There are various sources that say 50-150, 80-120, 100-300, etc, but to understand how perfect 100 fits comes from understanding density (see the linked spreadsheet above). Let’s stick with “Plant A” running an MLSS of 2,000 ppm. If their SSV30 triples to 600, settleability is way worse with a deeeep blanket. If we use the formula again, we now calculate SVI at 300. For every gram of solids, there is more space (volume) being occupied – more milliliters. It’s possible our specific gravity changed, but it would have to be cut to 1/3rd of what it usually is. Maybe we just have larger bugs, less compaction, waaay too many bugs, or some combination. This could be from young age, old age, the wrong kind of bugs, or maybe a hydraulic issue. We’re in the business of conserving space, so a minimal SVI is best for allowing more sludge to settle as it flows into the clarifier. However, if SVI is minimal, it might mean the sludge is grainy and able to compact easier which may indicate old sludge, aged like a fine wine. Possibly fermenting like a fine wine, too. Maybe to the point that we see rising sludge. Maximum SVI would indicate space is becoming occupied, thus reducing clarifier capacity and possibly resulting in bulking sludge. At a quick glance, the BMI analogy works here where a high number is undesirable. Less popular, but we also don’t want a number too low either. We want a middle-of-the-road “happy zone”. We can loosely associate SVI with age (high = young), but as usual, there are other factors to consider. Aeration rates (filamentous anyone?), sheer volume of sludge, or the ever-confusing impact of RAS rates (mass balance) will impact SVI in the clarifier, settleometer, or both. Here’s a graphic that shows how an SVI increase could mean young sludge OR excess (old). Tracking the SVI and comparing it to blanket depth, RAS rates, MCRT, etc will help us fine tune the plant as things change. It may lead to a decision to change AIR, RAS, or WAS (one at a time, please). It’ll also help us with future troubleshooting when we need to answer the question of “Is this a system problem, or a clarifier problem?” Go put that sample jug to use! PRACTICE QUESTIONS: Previous answers: A. Filamentous settles poorly, so decrease SLR to allow more opportunity to settle. C. Denitrification causes rising sludge. C. Organic settleable solids have a lot of bound water in their mass, so they’re more buoyant with a specific gravity being closer to 1.0.
Talking Shop - Interest? Talking Shop - Getting Started Talking Shop - Testing Talking Shop - Settling (Part 1) Talking Shop - Settling (Part 2) Link to Google Drive: Wastewater Info BTW – Did you hear about the bug that dropped out of the school’s WWTP? It was a bit dense. |
2024.05.13 09:47 schoolequipment2 Lab Glassware Lab Equipment Manufacturers, Suppliers and Exporters in India
Are you looking for the best lab equipment manufacturer in India for your biology classes? Look no further than School Equipment India! We make top-quality lab gear tailored for schools. Our products are designed to make learning biology easy and fun. With our equipment, students can do hands-on experiments to understand biology concepts better. Trust School Equipment India for all your biology lab needs! submitted by schoolequipment2 to u/schoolequipment2 [link] [comments] Lab Glassware Lab Equipment An Entire List of Lab Glassware Lab Equipment and How to Use Them 1. Beaker:
Beaker 2. Measuring Cylinder:
Measuring Cylinder 3. Rack, drying DBS cards:
Rack, drying DBS cards 4. Drying Slide Rack:
Drying Slide Rack 5. Drying Rack Wall Mount:
Drying Rack Wall Mount |
2024.05.13 07:24 DirtDiscombobulated9 Incorrect Review
https://preview.redd.it/jjkt32oqp40d1.png?width=1218&format=png&auto=webp&s=22aba9039c0e9b7639ea02ea158922f706621696 submitted by DirtDiscombobulated9 to OfficialPopulii [link] [comments] How did this reviewer become a reviewer? |
2024.05.12 20:25 Shankyyy1102 Perspective Drawing
2024.05.12 12:54 Kiri_yuri Blake and Weiss' fight scenes were the ones that got butchered the most in volume 4 and above. I miss how graceful and badass Weiss' fighting style was.
submitted by Kiri_yuri to RWBYcritics [link] [comments] |
2024.05.12 05:36 Particular_Lie_7995 I need serious help
2024.05.11 18:29 Inevitable_Skill_707 Gas laws are dealt inside physics too
2024.05.11 13:03 OriginalPapaya8 These are the Ford Corcel, Belina, Del Rey and Pampa. Four cars made in Brazil by Ford with a very rich and somewhat weird history that involves Brazil, the USA and France. Long post ahead.
THE BEGINNING: The Corcel is a medium-sized automobile produced by Ford in Brazil, from 1968 to 1986. Willys Overland do Brasil in a partnership with Renault were involved in a project for a new passenger car, a project that became known at the time as "Project M" which years later, in France became the Renault 12 and in Brazil gave rise to the Ford Corcel, due to the purchase of Willys Overland do Brasil by Ford in 1967, with this, all Willys do Brasil projects and vehicles are now controlled by Ford. "Project M" "Project M", now managed by Ford, is now called Ford Corcel and thanks to Ford, the vehicle project undergoes a series of improvements to adapt to the terrible driving conditions in Brazil. submitted by OriginalPapaya8 to WeirdWheels [link] [comments] MY SOURCE: https://youtube.com/@reliquiaautomotiva?si=YYP8QXAkG2-537Z0 THE ENGINES AND OTHER THINGS: ·1.3 RENAULT ENGINE (1968): Under the hood, the Corcel was equipped with a 1300 cc four-cylinder Renault engine. This engine developed 68 hp and 9.8 kg/m or 6.58 lb/ft of torque. This power, combined with the weight of 945 kg or 2083 pounds, allowed the car to go from 0 - 100 km/h or 0 - 62 mph in 23 seconds and reach a top speed of 129 km/h or 80.15 mph. One thing that was highly praised about the car was its consumption, averaging 10 km/l or 23.5 mpg in the city and 13.4 km/l or 31.5 mpg on the highway. The Ford Corcel had good safety by Brazilian standards at that time, the car had things like the split steering column, allowing it to deform and not hurt the driver too much in a crash, the hood opening forward, making that, even if the driver leaves it open, the force of the wind will not allow it to open and block the driver's view, the brakes, which were already efficient, could be improved with the optional disc brakes instead of drums, the Corcel also came with a sealed cooling circuit, being the first Brazilian car to feature this feature. ·IMPROVED 1.3 RENAULT ENGINE (1969 - 1971 CORCEL GT): Under the hood, the 1969 Corcel GT's engine was still the same 1.3 from Renault, but certain improvements to the package increased power to 80 hp and torque to 10 kg/m or 6.71 lb/ft. With this power, the Corcel GT did 0 - 100 km/h or 0 - 62 mph in 20 seconds and reached a top speed of 138 km/h or 85.7 mph. ·1.4 RENAULT GT-XP ENGINE (1972 CORCEL GT-XP): The engine, still of Renault origin, now has 1400 cc and has several improvements that made it develop 85 hp and 11.6 kg/m or 7.79 lb/ft of torque. This made the Corcel GT-XP go from 0 - 100 km/h or 0 - 62 mph in 16.6 seconds and reach a top speed of 144 km/h or 89.4 mph. ·1.4 RENAULT ENGINE (1973 CORCEL): Another new feature was the 1.4 engine with 75 hp and 11.6 kg/m or 7.79 lb/ft, which became standard for all versions. ·MODIFIED 1.4 RENAULT ENGINE (1978 CORCEL II): The Corcel II was equipped with the same 1.4 Renault engine as the first generation Corcel, but with power reduced to 72 hp. With these modifications, the new Corcel II accelerated from 0 - 100 km/h or 0 - 62 mph in 17.2 seconds and reached a top speed of 150 km/h or 93.2 mph. The Corcel II averaged 8.5 km/l or 19.9 mpg in the city and up to 13 km/l or 30.5 mpg on the highway. ·1.6 ENGINE AND 5-SPEED MANUAL TRANSMISSION (CORCEL II GT 1979): The 1.6 engine and 5-speed manual transmission become standard in this version. This engine developed 90 hp and 13 kg/m or 8.73 lb/ft of torque. This engine combined with the new 5-speed gearbox made the Corcel II GT accelerate from 0 - 100 km/s or 0 - 62 mph in 15.9 seconds and reach a top speed of 151 km/h or 93.8 mph. DESIGN / FACELIFTS / NEW GENERATIONS; ·FIRST DESIGN (1968): The Ford Corcel stood out on its debut for presenting a beautiful appearance, made up of straight lines, with emphasis on its front, which was marked by creases on the hood and by the chrome grille with horizontal friezes, highlighting the raised central part so that could follow the creases of the hood, the circular headlights were accompanied by the driving lights located at the bottom of the grille. Below the assembly was the chrome bumper with the space for the license plate in the center. On its side, the look is marked by the charm of the four-door sedan body and the crease that runs along the entire side of the car, the 13-inch wheels were accompanied by chrome hubcaps. At the rear, the highlight is the rectangular-shaped taillights and the chrome bumper. Another highly praised detail of its design was the large glass area, which favored visibility in all directions. ·FIRST FACELIFT (1971): In 1971, the Corcel received its first restyling, with a new grille with horizontal and vertical friezes and a new emblem in the center, the driving lights are now located below the bumper, and at the rear the only new feature is the four square-shaped taillights, two on each side. SECOND FACELIFT (1973): In 1973, the Corcel underwent a new facelift, this time much deeper and concentrated mainly on the front of the car, it gained a new hood, with a more aerodynamic design, in addition to a new grille with vertical friezes, a new emblem in the center and new headlight frames, the license plate left the bumper and began to be positioned below it, while the driving lights gained a new design, at the rear the lanterns gained a new design, having a rectangular shape and having reverse lights integrated with them. Inside the car, the only new feature is the dashboard which, regardless of the version, was only offered in a matte black colour. ·THIRD FACELIFT (1975): For the year 1975, the Corcel received a new facelift, with a lower hood that had the logo at the center and the Ford name on the right, a new grille, now made of plastic with horizontal stripes, new hubcaps, split tail lights and an gauge cluster with square dials. ·THE NEW GENERATION FORD CORCEL II (1977): The new second generation Corcel arrived with a beautiful look that followed the trend of the time, made up of straight lines and a two-door body with a fastback style rear, in addition, it is also worth highlighting the new look of its front, made up of headlights rectangular and new driving lights located at the ends next to the headlights, in the center the new engine cooling grille was painted in black and had the Ford logo in the center, but the main highlight of this new grille came from the aerodynamic design. of its horizontal blades, which provided a more intense air flow even at lower speeds, while the bumper, depending on the version, could be painted black or chrome. This new generation lost the option of a four-door body due to the fact that at that time, Brazilians only preferred cars with two doors, but to facilitate access when getting in or out of the vehicle, the most efficient solution was to adopt huge doors, which helped even the rear seat occupants. The main highlight at the rear of this sedan is the smooth fit of the C column, which went all the way to the trunk lid, while the license plate came out of the bumper and is positioned between the rear lights, which have a cleaner, more rectangular design. Inside, the new Corcel was more luxurious and sophisticated, featuring a fully carpeted interior and reclining front seats. The new panel was marked by a beautiful look that followed the trend of the time. Made entirely of plastic and with details such as a radio in the center and two rectangular ventilation outlets at the ends. The instrument panel had information in three circular markers, the first with a speedometer, the second, in the center, with an analog clock and the third with a fuel level marker and warning lights. ·1979 TWEAKS: In 1979 the car was slightly modified, gaining new transparent front lights and new rear lights with a beaded design in addition to a new four-spoke steering wheel for the LDO version. In addition to new options such as 5-speed gearbox, headlight washers and a new 1.6 engine. ·1980 TWEAKS: In 1980, the Ford Corcel II received new bumpers with plastic tips, a coolant temperature marker and options such as radial tires, three-point seat belts and a smoked sunroof, while the GT version gets a red trim next to the black paintwork. 1982: In 1982, the Corcel II line received improvements to the gearbox and suspension, in addition to a new central console with digital clock and air conditioning, which was only offered as an option. 1984: In 1984 the Ford Corcel II received new headrests and a new two-spoke steering wheel. VARIANTS; ·CORCEL TWO DOOR COUPE (1969): The Corcel began to be a great success, and because of this Ford decided to expand the options in 1969, and the first of them was the two-door coupé version, standing out for its sportier look, thanks to the look of the rear side with lines reminiscent of muscle cars and the rear part of the roof that had a smooth slope to the height of the trunk. Another reason why this version was highly acclaimed was the fact that at that time Brazilians had a great preference for cars with just two doors. TRIM LEVELS; ·CORCEL STANDARD: Initially the Ford Corcel was only available in the most basic version, called Standard. It had a simple but well-finished interior, with emphasis on the internal space, enough to seat 5 people in relative comfort, thanks to the one-piece seats and good wheelbase. The dashboard also had a simple design, with a glove box, ashtray and radio. The gauge cluster only had the essentials for the time, that is: fuel level gauge, speedometer, engine temperature gauge and warning lights. The huge steering wheel has two spokes, and the transmission was a four-speed manual with a lever on the floor. ·CORCEL LUXO (1969): In 1969 the luxury version of the Corcel was released. It had a more sophisticated finish, with details such as trims, various chrome parts, new interior linings, individual front seats with reclining backrests and a panel with new details such as a padded upper part and applications that imitate rosewood. ·CORCEL GT (1969): Launched in 1969 and aimed at a younger audience, the Corcel GT was only available in a two-door coupe version. It had details such as a vinyl roof with the GT logo on the C-pillar, stripes on the sides, black paint on the hood and rear, fog lights, and claws with a rubberized finish on the bumpers. Inside, the GT version featured a new three-spoke sports steering wheel, forced ventilation with two speeds and a complete gauge cluster with: speedometer, rev counter, oil level gauge, fuel level gauge, engine temperature gauge and a voltmeter for the battery. ·CORCEL GT (1971 FACELIFT): The GT version also received a facelift to accompany the others, with high beam headlights embedded in the grille, the grille was even painted in black and had the GT emblem in the center, the hood was also painted matte black and had a fake air vent in the center. ·CORCEL GT-XP (1972): In 1972, the Corcel GT gained a new name and more improvements, such as new wheels with a sporty design, new side stripes, while the markers, previously located in the central part of the panel, were now grouped together on the new central console. ·CORCEL GT-XP (1973): The Corcel GT-XP brought new visual features such as new rectangular headlights integrated into the grille, new side stripes, and two stripes on the hood, similar to those of the Ford Mustang. ·CORCEL LDO (1975): In 1975 was the even more luxurious version called LDO and stood out for presenting a more sophisticated finish, with a vinyl roof, chrome trim on the wheel arches, painted filets on the sides and the same sports wheels as the GT-XP version but without the black paintwork. Inside, it gained new interior linings, dashboard and seats in brown and beige and an exclusive steering wheel. ·CORCEL GT-XP (1975): The Corcel GT-XP only received aesthetic updates, such as new stripes on the sides and hood and new exterior mirrors. ·CORCEL II STANDARD (1978): This version of the Corcel II came without side moldings, had bumpers painted black and came with wheels that had a closed central core. ·CORCEL II L (1978): The intermediate version featured moldings in the middle of the side, chrome bumpers, wheels with a red central core or a crown design in the center. ·CORCEL II LDO (1978): The luxurious LDO version was equipped with chrome bumpers that had rubberized details, moldings at the bottom of the side and new wheels also with a red central core and a silver crown design in the center. The LDO version brought the charm of a monochromatic leather interior with applications that imitated rosewood. ·CORCEL II GT (1978): The new Corcel II GT had a look marked by black paint on the upper part of the body up to the C column, which was surrounded by fillets in yellow and red, black wheels with chrome over rims and high-flying headlights located below the bumper. Inside, the new features are the new three-spoke sports steering wheel, the rev counter on the instrument panel, and the new instrumentation on the central console, which included the oil level marker and the battery voltmeter. The engine was not changed, continuing with the same 72 hp as the other versions. ·CORCEL II GT (1979): This year the GT version undergoes improvements, such as new black stripes located on the lower part of the body, stiffer suspension and black bumpers. ·CORCEL II HOBBY (1980): It was in 1980 that the new version, called Corcel II Hobby, was launched. Aimed at a younger audience, the Hobby version stood out for its cooler look, marked by the bodywork without chrome details and the black wheels with chrome rims. Inside, this version featured red and black trim, the sports steering wheel of the GT version and an instrument panel with a silver finish. ·CORCEL II OS CAMPEÕES SPECIAL SERIES (1982): This special series featured details such as black paint with gold details, gold wheels, fog lights, black leather and black velvet interior, instrument panel with rev counter, digital clock on the center console, five-speed gearbox and options such as a sunroof, radio cassette player and air conditioning. THE FORD DEL REY: The Del Rey was a Ford luxury sedan launched in the early 1980s and discontinued ten years later, having been replaced by the Versailles. It is a medium sedan, with three well-defined volumes, a choice of two or four doors and robust engines. The model was derived from the Corcel and in its line there was also the station wagon version, called Del Rey Scala and the Pampa pickup truck. ·BEFORE LAUNCH: Ford had a big problem to face in the late 1970s. With the new decade, Ford began to remodel its cars with modern designs coming from North America so as not to lose sales to more modern models. As the market was in crisis, it was not possible to invest well in a new model, an option taken in the 1970s when they brought the Ford Maverick to the American market, an option revealed to be wrong later, as the initial project was to bring the Ford Taunus. The solution was to call for the creation of a new model, but with an existing platform on the national market. The options were to create a car based on the four-door Maverick, increasing its rear space, which was the model's biggest problem, or to create a product based on the Corcel II platform, launched two years earlier. In a clinic, two models were displayed to test consumer opinion, and the one chosen was the one that resembled the final design of the Ford Del Rey. A medium sedan, with three well-defined volumes, the option of two or four doors and an economical engine. , being the alternative to avoid higher costs. The model was based on the Ford Granada MKII models, a large model from English Ford manufactured at the same time, and the Ford Taunus, also from European Ford, but from Germany. They were very similar both front and rear, as well as the side, despite the Brazilian model being smaller. ·FIRST GENERATION (1981 - 1984): The Ford Del Rey debuted in mid-1981 and could be found in Gold and basic versions (popularly called "Silver"). It was a car with a refined finish, reminiscent of its older brother, the Ford Corcel under construction, but at the same time reminiscent of the good old Galaxie/Landau. The most complete version came as standard with items that were not common even in cars of its category, such as light alloy wheels, electric windows, electric door locks, rear view mirrors with internal control, velvet seats, fog lights, digital clock located on the central rear view mirror, among other things. The model received an automatic transmission as an option in 1983, and in 1984 it received the CHT engine, a revision of the old 1.6 engine of Renault origin that equipped the Corcel GT, and which was revised to equip the recently arrived Ford Escort. The engine did a lot of good for the model which, despite being economical, suffered during accelerations and restarts, and was the target of criticism from its owners, always losing in comparisons with the main competitors of its time, such as Chevrolet Opala, Volkswagen Santana and after 1985 , the Chevrolet Monza. SECOND GENERATION (1985 - 1991): In 1985 Ford made some changes to the model, which would remain practically intact until the end of its life in mid-1991. The already tired sedan gained a new front, similar to that of the Ford Corcel, with a “grille” aerodynamics and a spoiler that served as a frame for the fog lights. The model began to have other names. The Silver and Gold were discontinued and the GL entered as a basic version, GLX as an intermediate and the Ghia as a top-of-the-line version. It lost the refinement of alloy wheels, but gained new items. The rim increased to 14 inches and was the first non-sports car in Brazil to use a 60 profile. The 1987 model featured electric rear-view mirrors. With the Ford Corcel leaving the line the previous year, Ford created the L version, with a more stripped-down finish, to fill the gap between the Escort and the Del Rey. In 1988 the model had no relevant changes. With the merger of Volkswagen and Ford in 1987, Autolatina was created, a large company that came to dominate the market and almost cannibalized Ford of Brazil. The Del Rey was one of the few models that profited from this merger, as it gained the more modern AP 1.8 engine (which was equipped with the Volkswagen Santana). With a small performance gain, its top speed rose from 146 km/h to around 156 km/h, and its acceleration from 0 to 100 km/h went from 16.50 in the 1986 GLX version to around 13.88 seconds, due to the new gear reduction and small increase in power. The Del Rey received some mechanical changes, recalibrated springs at the rear to improve the “anti-dive” effect when accelerating and “anti-squat” when braking. The exterior mirror received a modified base in 1989. The last really notable difference between the models with the 1.6 and 1.8 engines was the consumption, which had increased slightly. In 1991 the Del Rey was taken out of production. It is a model well remembered for the modernity it had in its time, as its bigger brother (Ford Landau) did not have many modern features (such as electric windows, electric locks and electric mirrors). Its replacement, the Ford Versailles, was not as successful due to its lack of charisma. THE FORD BELINA: During the development of the M project (later named Corcel) in partnership with Renault, Willys-Overland do Brasil was studying the project of a station wagon/van to occupy the market niche left by the end of DKW-Vemag Vemaguet in 1967 At the same Volkswagen do Brasil was working on a similar project for a while, the Variant station wagon. After the purchase of Willys do Brasil by Ford, the M project continued to be developed. On August 26, 1968, the M project was presented at Clube Pinheiros in São Paulo during the Ford-Willys dealer convention. Named Corcel, the new vehicle was being launched on the market to compete with the VW Beetle. At the same event, Ford presented the prototype of a Corcel station wagon in September 1968. The first prototype of the Corcel station wagon was seen circulating around the factory in São Bernardo do Campo undergoing tests. Ford even transported a prototype station wagon to its stand at the VI São Paulo Motor Show, with its management undecided about showing the model. In the end, the station wagon ended up not being shown. Instead of launching, Ford chose to carry out further tests of two models: two and four doors (never adopted for series production). The tests were carried out throughout 1969 on Estrada Velha de Santos. The Ford Belina was launched on the market on March 3, 1970, approximately three months after the Volkswagen Variant.[6] After the launch of Variant and Belina, VW and Ford began an “advertising war” in the station wagon market, with each factory praising its product and criticizing its competitor. In the end, the German automaker prevailed with the argument of the simple and robust mechanics of the air engine (the same as the Volkswagen Beetle). Thus, the Variant's production was around six times greater than that of the Belina. In one of the first tests carried out by the press, unusual wear was noticed on the Belina's front tires. An error was later discovered in the adjustment of the front suspension of the Corcel-Belina line, which forced Ford to call on all owners of Corcel-Belina line vehicles manufactured between 1969 and 1970 to come to Ford dealerships to have the suspension readjusted. Despite not requiring replacement of parts, this was considered the first recall in Brazil. The bad reputation brought about by the problem affected Belina production, which went from 7831 (1970) to 5306 (1971) vehicles. The drop in production forced Ford to invest in the relaunch of the Corcel-Belina line in 1972. The main change for the Belina was the adoption of the 75 HP XP engine, replacing the original 68 HP. The production of mixed-use trucks (including station wagons) was encouraged by market acceptance. Between the first quarter of 1973 and 1975 there was a 26% growth in the production of mixed-use trucks (including station wagons) while car production in the country fell 3.9%. In 1973 production reached almost thirteen thousand copies. The Belina went through a period of growth in production that did not change even with the launch of the Chevrolet Caravan on the market in 1975. Derived from the Opala, the Caravan station wagon began to compete with the Belina for the market. Thus, Ford adopted a second restyling of the Belina in 1975, with changes to the front and improvements in the design and the adoption of a gas shock absorber to support the trunk lid instead of the obsolete spring shock absorber it used. The arrival of the Caravan and the launch of the remodeled Belina put pressure on the Variant, which began to lose market share until it was discontinued in 1977. At the same time, the Belina project, derived from the Corcel, was feeling the weight of age (given that it was from the 1960) and needed replacement. THE BELINA II: With the launch of the Chevrolet Chevette in Brazil (and the expectation of a future derivative station wagon launch), the announcement of FIAT's arrival in Brazil and the announcement of the launch of the Dodge 1800, Ford began studying changes to the Corcel line. Inherited from the acquisition of Willys-Overland do Brasil, the Corcel was a Renault project from the 1960s ready when it was taken over by Ford. At the end of 1973, the American multinational carried out the first restyling study of the Corcel. Belina, however, was not initially included because its competition was limited to the Variant. This later changed with the arrival of the Chevrolet Caravan and rumors of the production of a Dodge station wagon (which ended up not being released) and the Chevette station wagon. The redesigned Belina first appeared in print in October 1976. In 1978, the Belina received a modern update, when it was renamed Belina II, incorporating the main changes of the Corcel II, with straight lines. The versions were the L, simpler, and luxurious LDO. THE DEL REY SCALA: Derived from the Del Rey, the Scala was launched in 1983, being an evolution of the Belina. Available in a single version: Gold. With a superior finish, it introduced new equipment to the category: electric locks and windows, a ceiling console with a digital clock, reading lights and a panel that even had an oil pressure gauge. Air conditioning was optional. Initially, power steering was not offered, not even as an option. It was equipped with a 1.6 engine with 69 hp. In 1984 it received ventilated disc brakes at the front and its power increased slightly: 73 hp. In 1985 it received a facelift, with a new front and interior changes. It was now offered in two versions: GLX and Ghia. In 1986 it received power steering and a CHT E-Max engine. There was also a 4X4 version, launched in 1985 and discontinued in 1987, due to the high incidence of mechanical failures in the system. In 1987, she was called Belina again. Its production lasted until 1991, when it was discontinued to make way for the Ford Royale. At that time, Belina's sales represented half of the Del Rey family. FORD PAMPA: The Pampa was based on the second generation of the Corcel and was presented at the 1982 Motor Show, designed to compete with the Fiat Fiorino, Volkswagen Saveiro and Chevy 500. In the 1984 model, the first changes occurred, receiving the CHT engine, more powerful and economical. The 1600 cm³ CHT engine had 75 HP on alcohol and 73 HP on gasoline, respectively allowing the Pampa to reach a maximum speed of 145 km/h and 140 km/h. The 4x4 model, launched in the same year together with the Belina 4x4, was equipped with a four-speed gearbox, a one-piece seat and also had a second fuel tank in the alcohol version, for an additional 40 liters. Its interior was much more basic than the pioneering 4x2 model. In 1986, the basic, L and GL models came into existence, and in that same year the entire Pampa line received the front grille of the 4x4 version for the 1987 model. It was similar to the Del Rey, in addition to gaining the Ghia version with luxury items from the Del Rey Ghia model. These include a complete dashboard, windows and electric locks. Despite this, Pampa no longer has air conditioning, only offering hot air as an option. The Pampa had always been the leader among light pickup trucks until then and continued in this situation until it was discontinued. In 1990 it received the VW AP-1800 engine, powering the L, GL and Ghia versions. The CHT 1.6 still remains in the L and GL 4x4 versions. The following year the S version arrives, much more sporty and complete, only coming with a 1800 cm³ engine and bringing standard items such as external hooks, protective rubbers for the edges of the bucket, day and night rear view mirror, optional power steering, individual adjustable seats , stylized wheels, personalized stripes on the sides, sliding rear window, front spoiler with built-in fog lights and other items found in the Ghia version, such as an electric trio. In 1992 the Pampa received a new front grille, identical to that of the Del Rey, which production ended in 1991. Two years later it received an electronic carburetor (2E CE) for the 1800 cm³ engines. In 1995, the Ghia and Jeep GL 1.6 4x4 versions were discontinued, leaving only the L (1.6 and 1.8), GL (1.8) and S (1.8). The Pampa ceased production in 1997, the model year in which the 1.8 engines were equipped with EEC-IV single-point electronic injection, becoming the best-selling automobile-derived pickup in the segment, exceeding 380,000 units sold. Even in the face of competitors with more modern designs such as the recently launched Corsa pick-up, the second generation of the Saveiro, the third generation of the Fiorino pick-up, and the first generation Hilux imported into Brazil, which was initially a small pick-up, and the Mazda B2200, the Pampa has always been a sales leader, extremely popular, robust and attracting a legion of fans across the country, it was succeeded by the Courier, which never had the same sales figures, and it is often possible to see more Pampas on the streets than Couriers . TRIVIA; ·What is interesting is that although the Renault and Ford models had completely different designs, they shared the same platform, engines and wheels that had three holes and which became famous in Brazil for exactly this reason. ·The name Corcel, means Steed in Portuguese and was chosen as a homage to the Ford Mustang. |
2024.05.11 02:53 FantasticVictory837 Bluebook Test 6: Math Module 2 Easy, Question #18
submitted by FantasticVictory837 to u/FantasticVictory837 [link] [comments] |
2024.05.10 20:50 captnamurica2 HAYPP Group: Capitalizing on the Nicotine Pouch Craze
I run a small hedge fund based out of Raleigh, NC. Myself and my Fund are long $HAYPP. Please see the disclaimer at the bottom of the post. For more blog posts like this check out my Fund's blog at https://www.rogue-funds.com/blog submitted by captnamurica2 to BurryEdge [link] [comments] All Financial Figures are in USD unless otherwise specified. I think HAYPP Group, the biggest online retailer of nicotine pouches, can capture a huge chunk of the sales in what I believe will be the biggest form of nicotine intake growth over the next 10-15 years. The future of nicotine consumption will be nicotine pouches and it is growing at an unprecedented rate. Here in the States the go to item for nicotine pouches are Zyn’s (owned by Philip Morris), in Europe it’s Velo (owned by British American Tobacco), but there are various other brands that all catching fire: ON! (Altria), Rogue, Juice Head, FRE, Lucy, and Sesh, among various others. What is HAYPP? Brief History HAYPP is an online retailer and distributor of nicotine pouches and snus. The company was started by a couple of Swedish teenagers in 2009 and through mergers and acquisitions they no longer are in charge of the company as the current CEO joined in 2017/2018. The company bought Nicokick.com and northerner.com (northerner owns 9% of stock) which are now both of their main American brands. They switched from Snus to Nicotine Pouches 6 years ago and haven’t looked back. Domains Owned By HAYPP Group HAYPP currently owns a roughly 85% online market share for their Nordic part of the business, which they refer to as their “core” business as well as a ~55% market share of the oral nicotine market (85% market share of the nicotine pouch e-commerce market) for their growth market which is considered the US, UK, Germany, and Swiss countries. Market Share of HAYPP HAYPP vs Closest Competitor in each Market SEO Powerhouse So how do they have such a grasp on what would obviously be a hyper competitive online industry? The main reason for their hyper success in the online market is that they have a death grip on the SEO landscape. Their mastery of SEO allows them to spend almost nothing on marketing and to keep pushing out their distribution system (which continues to drive costs down for them and consumers). This creates a positive feedback loop as they become even cheaper than their competitors, allowing them to lock in customers (over 90% of the customers becoming recurring customers). How Consumers find HAYPP HAYPP Marketing Expenses as a % of Sales If you google just about anything related to Nicotine pouches, there is probably a 95%+ chance that the top unpaid search result will be a HAYPP Group Domain. Even niche searches such as “what is an upper decky” (Gen. Z slang for nicotine pouches) or basic searches such as “what are the top nicotine pouches” you will see that HAYPP Group owns the top of the search. https://preview.redd.it/e7ocu0jdanzc1.png?width=975&format=png&auto=webp&s=f8e80b8d743de3dc9133504bd6ff85dbbaee48bb Google Searches Highlighting the SEO power of HAYPP This is huge when sites like Google severely limit the amount of advertising that addictive products can utilize on their search engine. HAYPP ends up barely spending anything on marketing due to 40% of new customers coming through word of mouth and the rest from SEO. Data Their other field of expertise is data collection and selling. Due to the large variety of pouches and being the number one online seller of nicotine pouches, they have created a major database which they sell to various nicotine pouch producers such as Philip Morris and Altria. Producers buy these on an annualized basis, and you can see the usage of their data among the investor relation reports/presentations/websites of various producers. As you can see from my beautiful pictures on this post, they compile plenty of data to help me understand the business better. Lowest Cost Seller and Best E-Commerce Distribution Due to their distribution network, HAYPP has become one of the cheapest (if not the cheapest) sellers of nicotine pouches in the world. You can buy Zyn’s cheaper from HAYPP websites than you can from the ZYN website. Haypp’s prices are 20-40% cheaper than grocery stores and 30-50% cheaper than convenience stores. They have been integrating their distribution network so that most variable costs are being converted to vertical fixed costs creating operating leverage for them as they rapidly scale their revenue and are able to increase margins. They have implemented 2-day delivery across the US and close to implementing across Europe markets as well. https://preview.redd.it/0sajvfgkanzc1.png?width=975&format=png&auto=webp&s=3aad16b9df1be7bf6bbcc8f16ebf8c469c15b3a0 HAYPP Distribution Leveraging Market Share for High Quality New Products The last part of their business model is their ability to leverage their large consumer base to help new products capture market share, which allows them to capture higher margins on their products and it increases the variety of products which consumers would like to buy. In Nordic countries the variety of products is a benefit to them as consumers want to try various brands and flavors. When this competition trend hits the US it will only benefit them even more. Why Haypp vs Pouch Companies Currently in the US there are only a couple main brands with Zyn owning a huge chunk of the market. In Europe, Velo is the most popular brand but there are many Nordic brands that consistently attack margins and currently there is little competition in the US market which most likely won’t last much longer. As consumers search out the cheapest product and try to hunt for variety, HAYPP will be that future as convenience stores lag in variety and cost. Products such as Zyn will definitely continue to grow (currently Zyn is growing at 70% y/y) but we could see margins shrink as competition becomes fiercer and consumers branch out away from the first movers, although Zyn continues to take up 70% of the US market. This only further benefits HAYPP as they are the go-to spot for a large amount of variety. Although they don’t benefit as much from less competition, they are still beneficiaries of an oligopoly esque market due to their cost and distribution networks. Most large publicly traded pouch companies are also cigarette and chewing tobacco sellers who are rapidly seeing those segments get cannibalized by vaping and nicotine pouches combined with regulatory crackdown risk. Since HAYPP has no exposure to either one, you will not experience any cannibalization outside of snus cannibalization in the Nordics. This is the best pure play bet on nicotine pouch consumption. Certain countries have limited the ability for consumers to have access to nicotine via retail stores which will allow them to take huge shares of the overall market in places like Germany or in California where they have banned flavored nicotine products in retail stores has led to windfall of customers to HAYPP’s e-commerce model. Management The current CEO of HAYPP group, Gavin O’Dowd, used to work for British American Tobacco (BAT) and was the driving force for the VELO acquisition. He currently owns 3.6% of the stock and various other PE firms and Family Offices own large chunks of HAYPP. Most executives have warrants that could give them the right to 200k-400k shares each (29m shares outstanding with no serious history of dilution). Regulations As many of you are aware, regulations are a huge part of the nicotine industry. Taxes are going to be huge risks, which are then combined with flavor bans. I think nicotine pouches are one of the products that are least likely to get hit with serious bans since their health risk is much lower than almost any other nicotine product. The nicotine pouch industry as a whole has been behaving spectacularly well when it comes to ensuring they are not purposefully marketing to young people. They are trying to avoid having a Juul 2.0 fiasco which basically murdered that business and completely fragmented the vaping industry which is on the brink of regulatory crack down. HAYPP does their part by ensuring age regulation across their whole site. They have age verification to order and deliver. They have a huge emphasis on ensuring that they abide by the law. Financials Core Segment (Nordic Countries) The company is growing heavily in every segment that it operates in. Its core segment seems to be slowing down in growth due to heavy cannibalization from snus sales. This should only be temporary as nicotine pouch volume grows at 30%+ y/y. Once snus nears its cannibalization endpoint, I would expect revenue to begin growing again in its core market (although not at 30%). Current revenue is $250m USD and EBITDA is about $18m USD for just the core segment for the last twelve months. Management expects high single digit EBITDA margins for 2025. Core Segment Sales and EBITDA Margin Growth Segment (US, UK, Germany, Switzerland) The growth segment is skyrocketing. Growth is over 46% y/y and this growth has been consistent and should continue to be consistent. EBITDA margin for the growth markets has begun to inflect positively which will cause a massive amount of leverage in their EBITDA to occur as their fixed cost model begins to do its job. As economies of scale drive forward, we should see this margin increase substantially over the coming years. Currently Revenue is at $77m USD for growth markets and EBITDA is at -$3.5m USD. Growth Segment Sales and EBITDA Margin Let’s Talk about the Growth Segment a bit more. This is where the real value from HAYPP will come into play. While it currently begins to inflect positive in terms of profitability, it should be noted that the Growth markets have a massive TAM compared to their core market and could cause the company to 5x in the next few years if they maintain or gain market share and continue to grow in these massive TAMs. Total TAM growth As they grow, their competitive advantage deepens due to sticky customers and cheaper products from economies of scale. The US has an even faster scale of 49%+ growth y/y and HAYPP is outpacing the US nicotine pouch growth at 57% y/y. As the US begins to approve various products and variety begins to flood the US market, a ton of US users want to try various Nordic brands that don’t have access which lends a very strong lean towards an online website such as HAYPP. The US is a very ripe environment along with the UK and Germany (where nicotine can only be sold online) for HAYPP to continue to outperform massively. Emerging Segment Their “emerging” segment is where they have begun to introduce vapes into their value chain. HAYPP is beginning to sell vapes to UK and Germany, but it is at the very beginning stages and has no current significant impact on their bottom or top line. The company says the growth they are experiencing in this segment has been very similar to the growth that they experienced when they introduced Nicotine Pouches in growth markets. This is the most likely segment to get hit with regulatory concerns, so for now I won’t even consider this in a to be a profitable unit and will just assume it will be a small drain on EBITDA for the foreseeable future. Balance Sheet The balance sheet is great with no large debt burden and good working capital management. As they hit profitability this yeaearly next year I would expect a cash build up until the company decides if they will be returning cash to shareholders or reinvesting in the business. Valuation HAYPP is extremely undervalued based on where they are from a profitability standpoint and their current inflection point. Due to their high growth, it will be hard to pinpoint an exact value on them so this will merely be an exercise in estimating their value among a range more than usual (anyone who claims they can perfectly value a high growth company is probably overvaluing due to unsound conviction). First let’s look at how they are currently valued, which is roughly 14x their core EBITDA. Now let’s take a second and think about how insane that statement was. Their core market is the Nordic countries which will be hitting growth again as their snus cannibalization slows, the Nordic countries basically have no further regulation risk for nicotine pouches, and it is a noncyclical industry. I would argue that 14x their core EBITDA is probably an appropriate valuation based on only their core segment. What this means is (if you haven’t noticed already) that you are getting their “growth” segment for free based on the valuation of the stock. The growth segment alone is probably worth multiples of the current stock price due to the massive TAM and extreme growth prospects. If we assume the emerging segment is worthless (which it isn’t and it will be profitable at some point) then that means all of the upside in the stock can be based on what the value of the growth segment. Based on TAM, growth, and lack of cyclicality then this leaves the only risk as regulation. There will most likely be some sort of regulation, but we are very far from that as the Tobacco industry has been very careful in how they implement their new nicotine pouch momentum in a more appropriate way compared to vapes. The most likely regulations will probably be flavor bans of some sort or retail bans (which further benefits HAYPP). Regulations will most likely be limited in scope due to just the sheer lack of mortality risk associated with pouches vs any other form of common nicotine intake. Based on their probable conservative revenue growth (40% average for the next 3 years, and 15% after that), EBITDA growth, the fact that they will have both core and growth markets at high single digit EBITDA margins in 2025, and their lack of cyclicality, then I would estimate that their Growth markets are worth a very conservative $400m-$500m USD. I am likely undershooting the valuation because they are driving profitability very fast and their revenue is growing closer to 40%-60% in growth markets right now. If they are able to keep up current growth figures and expand to double digit margins before the end of the decade then they could be worth 2x-3x this value (which is why valuing growth companies are so hard, because I can’t foresee the future). Again, I valued the emerging segment as worthless which is unlikely as well. So, based on the value of $450m USD for the growth markets and the current value of $240 USD for the Nordic markets, that would create a sum of the parts equal to roughly $700m or nearly triple the current share price. This valuation leaves a ton of room for margin expansion and higher growth prospects because let’s face it, the US alone is probably worth at least 3x-5x more than the Nordic countries not including the UK, Germany, or Swiss. This is a very conservative valuation for the company, but it shows how great the risk/reward is based on the current price. Using a conservative valuation here also helps accommodate for regulation risk. In SEK terms this would be 250 SEK/share or 7.35B SEK. Conclusion Even accommodating for regulation risk, a valuation of $700m seems appropriate as a starting point for the valuation for HAYPP Group. I think there is a very high likelihood that I could be off on this by a large margin, but I feel like the downside is very protected with this valuation. Management has been great in execution and I expect that to continue. In a more bullish case where every segment of the company fires on all cylinders we could see a valuation of $1.5B+, but that is not a scenario that I would like to bet my investors’ money on. For now, I will stay invested and keep watching them execute and adjust my valuation accordingly. Disclaimer: The author of this idea and his Fund have a position in securities discussed at the time of posting and may trade in and out of this position without informing the reader. Opinions expressed herein by the author are not an investment recommendation and are not meant to be relied upon in investment decisions. The author is not acting in an investment adviser capacity. This is not an investment research report. The author's opinions expressed herein address only select aspects of potential investment in securities of the companies mentioned and cannot be a substitute for comprehensive investment analysis. Any analysis presented herein is illustrative in nature, limited in scope, based on an incomplete set of information, and has limitations to its accuracy. The author recommends that potential and existing investors conduct thorough investment research of their own, including detailed review of the companies' SEC and CSA filings, and consult a qualified investment adviser. The information upon which this material is based was obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but has not been independently verified. Therefore, the author cannot guarantee its accuracy. Any opinions or estimates constitute the author's best judgment as of the date of publication and are subject to change without notice. The author and funds the author advises may buy or sell shares without any further notice. This article may contain certain opinions and “forward-looking statements,” which may be identified by the use of such words as “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “should,” “planned,” “estimated,” “potential,” “outlook,” “forecast,” “plan” and other similar terms. All such opinions and forward-looking statements are conditional and are subject to various factors, including, without limitation, general and local economic conditions, changing levels of competition within certain industries and markets, changes in legislation or regulation, and other economic, competitive, governmental, regulatory and technological factors, any or all of which could cause actual results to differ materially from projected results. |
2024.05.10 20:45 captnamurica2 HAYPP Group: Capitalizing on the Nicotine Pouch Craze
2024.05.10 20:43 Richard-P-Feynman Coffeejack 1 Week Review - Why it doesn't work
2024.05.10 19:39 JamFranz My wife has been acting strange ever since I had my MRI