![]() |
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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 02:05:35 GMT, Roger Halstead
wrote: The life of a PSRU on a piston engine has to be complicated. It not only has to handle linear torque and thrust, but virtually any other imaginable angle as well. Then it has to be designed to avoid any resonances with those power train pulses AND take the positive and negative torque without beating the snot out of the gears which means next to nothing for slack (which brings its own set of problems). Helical, double helical, spur, planatery...each with it's own set of pluses and minuses. Most manufacturers seem to take the attitude that big is strong and bigger is stronger. In order to resist the impulses and resonances you mention, they just design huge gears to take the load. BUT, didn't the big 12 and 16 cylinder Vs in WWII have PSRUs? Course those engines had very short TBOs too. Then again they weren't exactly babied either. Yup, the Roll Royce Merlin uses a spur gear reduction drive, driven off a torque tube. Those gears are some big. Every single one of the big radials also used a reduction drive, but was a planetary type, not spur. I think the low TBO was more due to the nature of the treatment of the engine during combat than something inherent in the design. But come to think of it, they still don't have a very high TBO even now, when they don't have to be run up to military power for every takeoff. By the way, the Rolls Royce Griffon engine was sort of two 12 cylinder engines siamesed together for a total of 24 cylinders. I'd hate to work on that thing. Also...How did the guys make out using the Olds chain drive in the Legend? It "appeared" to work great for at least a short time, but they were running 400 to 500 HP through a chain that was used in a drive train that only had about 200 HP on the other end. When I talked to the one guy at Oshkosh some years back he thought it had plenty of reserve. I always like that airplane. Last I saw it had a turbine up front. Sorry, that should be NSI. I know when he used the original "so called" chevy big block aluminum based engine he felt the front web was the weak spot. Course that was right after planting his IV_P off the end of the runway when the web broke. (or did he make it back on that one?) At any rate the web broke and it was a high pucker factor. I hadn't heard that the web broke. The story I got was that they did some computer analysis of the engine design and factored in the prop forces that would be transferred to the block by the PSRU and decided to add material to the block where the PSRU bolted on. Of course, Jim could have told me this AFTER the engine broke, don't know. Corky Scott |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Single-Seat Accident Records (Was BD-5B) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 41 | November 20th 03 05:39 AM |
Objective Engine Discussion | Rick Maddy | Home Built | 26 | October 14th 03 04:46 AM |
FS: O-235C1 Lycoming engine (core) | Del Rawlins | Home Built | 0 | October 8th 03 09:46 PM |
Corky's engine choice | Corky Scott | Home Built | 39 | August 8th 03 04:29 AM |