On 25/08/2015 5:24 PM, wrote:
> On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 6:27:34 PM UTC-7, graham wrote:
>> On 24/08/2015 7:15 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
>>> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 18:33:39 -0600, graham wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 24/08/2015 4:59 PM, Xeno wrote:
>>>>> On 25/08/2015 8:08 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
>>>>>> On 2015-08-24 5:30 PM, wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If I were John, I would send away for a replacement set
>>>>>>> of the Capresso burrs (Swiss), and figure out how to retrofit
>>>>>>> his B&D burr grinder with them. Because burrs don't last forever.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh sure. Those coffee beans are so much tougher than the steel burrs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Swing by the Grand Canyon next time you're in the area. Water erodes
>>>>> stone! ;-)
>>>>>
>>>> Actually, it's the sediment carried by water that erodes stone.
>>>> Graham
>
> How about cavitation erosion?

Not a bad one but I think what is being talked about is more in the
sense of "abrasion" whereas cavitation erosion is more akin to a gas
bubble "hammering" effect.

http://tinyurl.com/o4x3u3h

To be sure, in both instances, matter is removed.

Had a case recently where an input line filter was clogged in a Benz
power steering pump. We could tell it was cavitating because of the
noise it created and, had we not rectified the situation it would have
caused pitting which is a different effect from the abrasion markings
caused by foreign particle contamination. The end result would have been
the same, a prematurely worn out component.

>
>>>
>>> Water without any sediment, water is still very effective in erosion.
>>> If you pour a bucket of water into a pile of dirt, what happens? The
>>> force of fast moving water is very effective at wearing away rocks.
>>>
>> Oh, Sorry! I must be out of date then. After all, I received my geology
>> Ph.D 45 years ago and have been working in the profession since then.
>> Graham
>
> So would it be fair to say your head is chock full of rocks, after
> a half-century of studying them?
>
That's a little harsh..

--

Xeno