Talk:Hydraulics

Untitled
Come help with WikiProject Fluid dynamics moink 23:10, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Fluid Power -> Hydraulics and Pneumatics
Both hydraulics and Pneumatics are sub-categories of Fluid Power. The discussion of the general principles should be in a new page Fluid Power with hydraulic and pneumatic covering specifics and referring back to Fluid Power. I'm willing to tackle Fluid Power. -RatOmeter
 * Not sure that you're right. Surely things like sewer engineering and water transport are part of hydraulics.Cutler 18:24, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I don't dispute that. The fact remains that fluid power deals with liquids and/or gases; hydraulics and pneumatics are specific to liquids and gases, respectively. Reference: http://www.nfpa.com/default.asp?pid=11 -User:RatOmeter
 * I'll be interested to see what you come up with but I fear that there is a danger of some stuff getting lost. Cutler 18:58, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

It is desirable to add some explannation about how hydraulics actually works with some examples. It is mostly magic that makes it work. (sub to crafterbox youtube channel!)

Car Hydraulics
Im looking for hydraulics like the ones on a car, can anyone redirect me?--72.79.126.240 04:24, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * See "lowrider"? Femto 11:32, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

One who works with hydraulics (and pneumatics too)
What do you call someone who works with pneumatics as a "as"? I.e. electrician is a trade job name for those that do wiring. A friend of mine says the trade job is "pipefitter". Any other insights? ~Gertlex 16:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC) lol the person on top of my article didn't know how to spell degree and shes talking about pneumatics and hydraulics ffs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.252.194.83 (talk) 21:37, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

We need to fix many "hydraulics" links to "hydraulic cylinder"
Many (probably most) of the articles that link to "hydaulics" or "hydraulic" are really referring to technologies based on the hydraulic cylinder or hydraulic motor, and not to the general physical science of the properties of fluids. At the very least we need to fix those links to point straight to hydraulic cylinder. Arriving from articles like backhoe and getting an article that's not immediately pertinent and doesn't even link to one that is is very unhelpful; it's like clicking microprocessor and arriving at electricity. I've added a (rather badly worded, I confess) dab link at the top of this article - I think it's really necessary given how many bad links there are to this. I've also taken a todo to fix these, but I'm rather time-poor right now, so any help is appreciated. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 14:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * A very good point. Hydraulics can have two meanings:
 * applied fluid dynamics, on one side of open water flows like rivers, canals, estuaries and seas, but also of pipe flows
 * technology of actuators operated by (high-pressure) fluids
 * So perhaps it is an idea to have two hydraulics articles, one for each field. And change this page into a disambiguation page. But I also do not have the time to do this myself. Crowsnest (talk) 19:04, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hydraulic machinery is more general than hydraulic cylinder and gives a good overview of the technology. Crowsnest (talk) 19:14, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Is hydraulics a dead science?
This article is just a description of the history of hydraulics, which also seems to stop somewhere halfway the 19th century. This cannot be true: where is the description of the scientific methods used in hydraulics, what happened in the present computer era, etc.? As it is, the article is highly unbalanced, and the main part of the article should be moved to a new article "History of hydraulics". Crowsnest (talk) 09:52, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Unless development stopped and they just don't do it anymore! 89.217.25.178 (talk) 19:01, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Confusion between religion and culture
The Muslim innovation section incorrectly represents Arabic innovations as being linked to religion rather than culture. While the section mentions Muslims and Islam again and again, the actual accomplishments listed are those of Arabic scientists and engineers. Arabs are generally Muslim, but there are many Muslims who are not Arabs. Since Roman accomplishments are listed by culture rather than religion, the same should be done for Arab accomplishments. The paragraph appears to be proselytizing for a specific religion even though religion had nothing to do with the advances described. Agateller (talk) 13:10, 15 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I would also prefer a non-religious related terminology. On the other hand, terms like Christian culture are also often used in a loose sense to denote cultural manifestations which are not necessarily religious. Maybe there are other articles (or sections in them) which have been named more neutral. Also some claims seem not very reliable: the water organ for instance seems more likely to have been invented in ancient Greece. -- Crowsnest (talk) 22:05, 15 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Given that neither individual linked in the article was actually an Arab (Biruni being Persian, Al-Khazini was Greek) one can question the concept of "Arabic Innovations" within the context of the two individuals. Biruni studied under another fellow Persian, Abu Nasr Mansur, and both are buried in present day Afghanistan.  Al-Khazini studied under a pupil of Omar Khayyam, also Persian. You could make a better case for Persian influence than Arab, scholastically. Caisson 06 (talk) 14:04, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Hanging Gardens of Babylon
How about you mention the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, Iraq, arent those the first ones to develop the hydraulic engineering?

Definition
An IP editor has changed the definition of "hydraulics" to "Hydraulics is a brach of engineering science which deals with the study of properties of fluids in rest or in motionapplied science engineering liquid." Which I don't agree with, however, I don't agree with the old def. either: "Hydraulics is a topic in applied science and engineering dealing with the mechanical properties of liquids." Both of these definitions are far too broad, as they both make me think of fluid mechanics. Any ideas on how better to define "hydraulics"? Wizard191 (talk) 15:55, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Misuse of sources
A request for comments has been filed concerning the conduct of. Jagged 85 is one of the main contributors to Wikipedia (over 67,000 edits, he's ranked 198 in the number of edits), and practically all of his edits have to do with Islamic science, technology and philosophy. This editor has persistently misused sources here over several years. This editor's contributions are always well provided with citations, but examination of these sources often reveals either a blatant misrepresentation of those sources or a selective interpretation, going beyond any reasonable interpretation of the authors' intent. I searched the page history, and found 17 edits by Jagged 85 (for example, see this edits). Tobby72 (talk) 17:58, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * That's an old and archived RfC. The point is still valid though, and his contribs need to be doublechecked. Tobby72 (talk) 20:56, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * An editor (J8079s) in particular has been going around removing his edits en masse. Jagged's edits were removed from this article under the edit summary failed verification. Yet I showed here that J8079s' edit summary "failed verification" was misleading (J8079 also admitted to his error). So my question is: why was the section on Muslim contributions removed? Was it bcause of "failed verification" or some other reason? Whatever the reason (i.e. unreliable sources, misrepresetnation of sources etc.), can it be clearly stated here? Thanks.Bless sins (talk) 20:40, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hydraulics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111228234152/http://asia.isp.msu.edu/wbwoa/south_asia/sri_lanka/history.htm to http://asia.isp.msu.edu/wbwoa/south_asia/sri_lanka/history.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:33, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hydraulics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927020022/http://www.shsu.edu/~his_ncp/SriLanka.html to http://www.shsu.edu/~his_ncp/SriLanka.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:44, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Text incorporation
Hello,

I have found an comprehensive field manual on hydraulics. It is an army field manual, full of hydraulic systems. The book is under Public Domain rights and available for free on Internet Archive website.

I was thinking creating new or editing the existing Wikipedia articles by incorporating whole chapters and/or sections from the book. Would that make a good Wikipedia article?

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marino108LFS (talk • contribs) 13:16, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Why Υδραυλική instead of Ὑδραυλική?
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hydraulic#English offers a slightly different etymology for the word "hydraulics", namely that it derives from Ancient Greek ὑδραυλικός. This word contains a written "h" in the form of the δασὺ πνεῦμα or spīritus asper, i.e. the reflected comma diacritic. Cf. e.g. https://artflsrv03.uchicago.edu/philologic4/LSJ/query?report=concordance&method=proxy&q=%E1%BD%91%CE%B4%CF%81%CE%B1%CF%85%CE%BB%CE%B9%CE%BA%CF%8C%CF%82&start=0&end=0. Why is the diacritic absent from the spelling in the article?Redav (talk) 14:02, 30 March 2023 (UTC)