If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
PSRU design advantages
Dan Horton wrote:
There is nothing that eliminates a long shaft from the design of a PSRU. Nonbelievers might be advised to consider ship propulsion; long shafts, low cylinder counts, propellers operating in uneven flow, often via a gearbox. Sound familiar? Yes, but they use mass for damping like solid shafts. Weight is nowhere near the issue it is for aircraft. Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
PSRU design advantages
Ian Stirling wrote:
Ernest Christley wrote: Ian Stirling wrote: Best tool available to the amateur is a variable speed strobe - Party Light! That way you can actually look and SEE what's happening. That'll spot ordinary vibrations. Torsional ones are a little bit harder. Especially if you want, as you probably should, a graph of maximum stress anywhere in the shaft/PSRU/Prop system vs RPM. A few fine white lines down the length of the shaft will clear up that problem. Will they? It'll obviously show huge torsional movement, but many, especially shorter shafts may fail before it becomes visible. Ian, if it won't stay together long enough to turn on the strobe, it probably needs a little more work... Richard |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
PSRU design advantages
Jim in NC writes:
I think you will find that they do it on ships, with pure weight. A big, heavy, solid steel shaft. Very heavy! That is how they get the stiffness. Sheesh. Shaft weight is not a factor. And more stiffness may or may not be desired. Shaft stiffness is one of the parameters that may be adjusted (up OR down) so that the system has a natural frequency not matched by a significant exciting frequency. If the system is driven by internal combustion, identifying the most significant exciting frequency is dead simple. It is (RPM x #cyls)/120 = hertz for a 4-stroke and (RPM x #cyls)/60 = hertz for a two stroke. Designing a system with a natural frequency that does not match the exciting frequency identified by this equation is easy IF the engine runs at one RPM only. It gets a lot harder if you expect to use a wide RPM range. Also, the shaft turns very slowly, so there are many pulses per revolution; more than you will get with a 4 or 6 cylinder, 4 cycle airplane engine, in most cases. Sheesh again. Shaft rotational speed alone is not a factor. Shaft speed AND number of propeller blades may be of interest if disturbed flow is the source of an exciting frequency. "Pulses per revolution" sort of defines the term ''order" as it is used in rotordynamics (the number of times anything happens per revolution). A handy term, nothing more. For example, a ship's shaft at 90 RPM turns 1.5 times per second. If it has a four-blade prop and a single source of disturbed flow (perhaps a strut supporting the shaft), then the disturbance is a 4th order event. Order times rotational speed per second (4 x 1.5) means an exciting frequency of 6 hertz. In this case let us hope the engineer designed a system with no natural frequencies between 4 and 8 hertz. Wnat another example of speed x order? Consider the cardan joint. I agree with the rest of your post; dig into the engineering text books. I wish you well with them. Dan |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
PSRU design advantages
Ian Stirling wrote:
Richard Lamb wrote: Ian Stirling wrote: Ernest Christley wrote: Ian Stirling wrote: Best tool available to the amateur is a variable speed strobe - Party Light! That way you can actually look and SEE what's happening. That'll spot ordinary vibrations. Torsional ones are a little bit harder. Especially if you want, as you probably should, a graph of maximum stress anywhere in the shaft/PSRU/Prop system vs RPM. A few fine white lines down the length of the shaft will clear up that problem. Will they? It'll obviously show huge torsional movement, but many, especially shorter shafts may fail before it becomes visible. Ian, if it won't stay together long enough to turn on the strobe, it probably needs a little more work... I suspect you know what I mean. But to clarify in any case, any shaft will have a given torque/torsional bending ratio. Say a half a degree at maximum safe load (or whatever) per 10 diameters. If the shaft is half a diameter long, it's going to be much harder to observe, than if it's 100. The discussion was about long shafts. Rear mounted engine on tractor airplane. No, it won't do much good on a 6" shaft. -- This is by far the hardest lesson about freedom. It goes against instinct, and morality, to just sit back and watch people make mistakes. We want to help them, which means control them and their decisions, but in doing so we actually hurt them (and ourselves)." |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
PSRU design advantages
ADK wrote: This is probably going to open old wounds. What I would like is experienced input on the advantages, for economic, efficiency and longevity etc. of different types of redrives. I am leaning towards a cog-belt reducer in a 6 cylinder, liquid cooled, configuration driving a long drive shaft to the prop. If it means anything, having the redrive and the 4 cyclinder ahead of the drive shaft probably helps. This means the system would be seeing a large number of small impulses rather than the small number of large impulses with a direct drive 4. On the other hand, the longer that drive shaft is, the lower its natural frquency, and the larger the gear reduction of your redrive, the higher the impulse frequency, so those might be coming into range of each other. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder | John Doe | Piloting | 145 | March 31st 06 06:58 PM |
Looking for a two-seater design | Shin Gou | Home Built | 13 | December 21st 04 06:44 AM |
Aircraft Design 1942 flying boats FA | Sally | Home Built | 0 | August 19th 04 06:49 PM |
amateur design consultant? | Shin Gou | Home Built | 14 | June 30th 04 01:34 AM |
How 'bout a thread on the F-22 with no mud slinging, no axe grinding, no emotional diatribes, and just some clear, objective discussion? | Scott Ferrin | Military Aviation | 23 | January 8th 04 12:39 AM |