A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Home Built
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

PSRU design advantages



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 2nd 06, 05:39 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default PSRU design advantages

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.


  #2  
Old April 2nd 06, 05:52 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default PSRU design advantages


"ADK" wrote in message
news:X6TXf.28774$%H.11944@clgrps13...
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.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Warning,Warning, Danger, Danger, Will Robinson!

Yep, that is a really big can of worms.

The redrive is not as big a problem as you think. You get into a mess when
you start talking about long drive shafts.

Torsional resonance has brought many of the great minds of the flying
industry to their knees. No joke. I don't have all of the links at hand,
but someone here does. Start by googling torsional resonance.

Then, be afraid. Be very afraid.
I you don't get afraid, keep looking, until you get afraid, because you need
to get afraid, or you don't understand the problem.
--
Jim in NC

  #3  
Old April 2nd 06, 06:12 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default PSRU design advantages

Morgans wrote:
"ADK" wrote in message
news:X6TXf.28774$%H.11944@clgrps13...
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.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Warning,Warning, Danger, Danger, Will Robinson!


LOL

Yep, that is a really big can of worms.

The redrive is not as big a problem as you think. You get into a mess
when you start talking about long drive shafts.


I'd recommend (ADK) research on the BD-5 drivetrain (redrives and long
driveshafts). Not unsurmountable, but a certainly a big can of worms as
you (Jim) state.

Efficiency isn't directly affected. Weight may be affected. Longevity
will be either good or very short (vibration), but not in between.
  #4  
Old April 2nd 06, 06:41 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default PSRU design advantages

("Morgans" wrote)
Torsional resonance has brought many of the great minds of the flying
industry to their knees. No joke. I don't have all of the links at hand,
but someone here does. Start by googling torsional resonance.

Then, be afraid. Be very afraid. I you don't get afraid, keep looking,
until you get afraid, because you need to get afraid, or you don't
understand the problem.



I'm not skeer't AND I don't understand the problem.

I thought the (rubber?) (toothed?) (cog?) belt redrives absorb? dampen? out
a lot of those problems - even, to some extent, the slightly longer shaft
kind of problems. Add a three bladed wooden prop, and you're golden. g

No?

Next I tackle Mu-1 issues...


Montblack
"Get out of the house. Now! That [post] came from your basement."
Fooled them. We don't have a basement. Ha!
"Then get out of your house, an F5 twister is coming down the street! Now be
afraid..."

  #5  
Old April 2nd 06, 07:07 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default PSRU design advantages


"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"ADK" wrote in message
news:X6TXf.28774$%H.11944@clgrps13...
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.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Warning,Warning, Danger, Danger, Will Robinson!

Yep, that is a really big can of worms.

The redrive is not as big a problem as you think. You get into a mess

when
you start talking about long drive shafts.

Torsional resonance has brought many of the great minds of the flying
industry to their knees. No joke. I don't have all of the links at hand,
but someone here does. Start by googling torsional resonance.

Then, be afraid. Be very afraid.
I you don't get afraid, keep looking, until you get afraid, because you

need
to get afraid, or you don't understand the problem.
--
Jim in NC

Yes, Sir! Lots of old wounds, etc, etc ...

Actually, I believe that a driveshaft can be part of the problem, solution,
or both--although, in and of itself, I agree that a long driveshaft is far
more likely to be a problem than a solution. Also, don't forget that all
resonance applied through the engine mount to the airframe will still
apply--there is a famous "Contact!" magazine article describing some of both
problems during the [attempted] development of the BD-5. The point here is
that, although a loss of power is the most obvious

And keep in mind that, although the redrive is not a source of torsional
resonance, the redrive is not inherently dampening. However, many redrives
can be a source of considerable shear and bending loads applied to the
crankshaft. I don't know how much is too much in either case.

As additional food for thought: I was a long time advocate of automotive
conversions, but I am now leaning away from them--as well as from many of
the more modern engine packages now available. I believe that they can be
just about as reliable in service, and that the probable weight penalty is
acceptable--if a slightly heavier airplane does the same job, burns a little
more fuel, and has a lower initial cost; it may still be the best value,
especially if you enjoy the education that you will achieve through the
development work. However, I am now leaning back toward the "traditional"
type certified engines because it may be much easier to get approval for IFR
operation. For some time to come, at least in the US, TFRs are going to
continue as a fact of life; and an IFR flight plan gives that greatest
assistance in staying out of difficulty on cross country flights. Just my
$.02, and YMMV.

Peter


  #6  
Old April 2nd 06, 07:42 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default PSRU design advantages

How would one of the composite props, such as an IVO or Warp drive fair in
an application such as I have described? Especially using a 3 or 4 blade
prop.
Also I want to use a segmented drive shaft so that each of two sections are
reduced in length over a single long shaft.
Would not using a 6 cylinder higher reving engine also be an advantage over
a lycoming for torsional vibration or would the concern only change in
frequency?
"Peter Dohm" wrote in message
...

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"ADK" wrote in message
news:X6TXf.28774$%H.11944@clgrps13...
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.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Warning,Warning, Danger, Danger, Will Robinson!

Yep, that is a really big can of worms.

The redrive is not as big a problem as you think. You get into a mess

when
you start talking about long drive shafts.

Torsional resonance has brought many of the great minds of the flying
industry to their knees. No joke. I don't have all of the links at
hand,
but someone here does. Start by googling torsional resonance.

Then, be afraid. Be very afraid.
I you don't get afraid, keep looking, until you get afraid, because you

need
to get afraid, or you don't understand the problem.
--
Jim in NC

Yes, Sir! Lots of old wounds, etc, etc ...

Actually, I believe that a driveshaft can be part of the problem,
solution,
or both--although, in and of itself, I agree that a long driveshaft is far
more likely to be a problem than a solution. Also, don't forget that all
resonance applied through the engine mount to the airframe will still
apply--there is a famous "Contact!" magazine article describing some of
both
problems during the [attempted] development of the BD-5. The point here
is
that, although a loss of power is the most obvious

And keep in mind that, although the redrive is not a source of torsional
resonance, the redrive is not inherently dampening. However, many
redrives
can be a source of considerable shear and bending loads applied to the
crankshaft. I don't know how much is too much in either case.

As additional food for thought: I was a long time advocate of automotive
conversions, but I am now leaning away from them--as well as from many of
the more modern engine packages now available. I believe that they can be
just about as reliable in service, and that the probable weight penalty is
acceptable--if a slightly heavier airplane does the same job, burns a
little
more fuel, and has a lower initial cost; it may still be the best value,
especially if you enjoy the education that you will achieve through the
development work. However, I am now leaning back toward the "traditional"
type certified engines because it may be much easier to get approval for
IFR
operation. For some time to come, at least in the US, TFRs are going to
continue as a fact of life; and an IFR flight plan gives that greatest
assistance in staying out of difficulty on cross country flights. Just my
$.02, and YMMV.

Peter




  #7  
Old April 2nd 06, 09:26 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default PSRU design advantages

ADK

Look up Molt Taylor and his Aerocar system. He used a pusher
arrangement and seemed to have most of the problems solved with long
shaft back to prop.

His bird may still be flying some place to exhibitions?

Am sure someone will jump in here and give data on his bird and how he
coupled shaft to engine with a "power glide" clutch or some such. It
allowed a small amount of slippage at each power stroke to prevent the
pulse being transmitted to drive shaft and prop as I recall.

Best of luck with a difficult problem.

Big John
`````````````````````````````````````````````````` ``````````````````

On Sun, 02 Apr 2006 16:39:19 GMT, "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.


  #8  
Old April 2nd 06, 09:36 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default PSRU design advantages

ADK wrote:
How would one of the composite props, such as an IVO or Warp drive fair in
an application such as I have described? Especially using a 3 or 4 blade
prop.


My cure the problem. May create it.

Also I want to use a segmented drive shaft so that each of two sections are
reduced in length over a single long shaft.


May solve the problem. May create it.

Would not using a 6 cylinder higher reving engine also be an advantage over
a lycoming for torsional vibration or would the concern only change in
frequency?


The concern is about frequency. Not power. Not absorbtion. Not
dampening. Not anything except frequency. If the power pulses
generated by the engine or turbulence around the propeller (the ONLY
excitation sources available in flight), or any of the harmonics of the
two matches the natural frequency of the prop/drivetrain combination,
you'll have a short useful life for the drivetrain.

--
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)."
  #9  
Old April 3rd 06, 12:57 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default PSRU design advantages

("Big John" wrote)
Look up Molt Taylor and his Aerocar system. He used a pusher arrangement
and seemed to have most of the problems solved with long shaft back to
prop.

His bird may still be flying some place to exhibitions?



http://www.airventuremuseum.org/coll...%20Aerocar.asp
EAA site with links at the bottom:
*Taylor Aerocar Design and Construction
*Taylor Aerocar Manufacturers History
*Taylor Aerocar Specifications
*Taylor Aerocar Virtual Exhibit

http://www.goldenwingsmuseum.com/Aircraft.html
Golden Wing's Museum Collection

http://www.goldenwingsmuseum.com/Air...ero%20Car.html
1954 Taylor Aero Car/Aerocar.

http://www.goldenwingsmuseum.com/Photo's/Aero%20Car-2.jpg
Bigger pic


Montblack
It would fly tomorrow - after some minor touch ups and an annual. Don't know
when it's scheduled to go up again. They take the car out and run around the
airport from time to time. School kids love the Aero Car during their tours.
It last flew maybe 5 years ago. Maybe 6?

  #10  
Old April 3rd 06, 01:12 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default PSRU design advantages


"Montblack" wrote

It would fly tomorrow - after some minor touch ups and an annual. Don't
know when it's scheduled to go up again. They take the car out and run
around the airport from time to time. School kids love the Aero Car during
their tours. It last flew maybe 5 years ago. Maybe 6?


I'm almost positive that I have seen it fly at OSH, within the past 3 years.
Last year, perhaps?

It was in the 1:00 PM showcase.
--
Jim in NC

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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 07:44 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 01:39 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.