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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
crankshaft counterweights
OK, you smart people, just some curiosity questions:
There appears to be some lack of precision in terminology, where the term "crankshaft counterweights" sometimes refers to the big weighty parts of the crankshaft that are part of the single piece of metal, and other times refers to some movable parts that are attached to the crankshaft. Am I right about this lack of precision? Is there a simple way to tell, say from the engine model number, whether an engine is equipped with the movable type of crankshaft counterweights? How are the movable type of crankshaft counterweights attached to the crankshaft? Does anyone have a picture or drawing or explanation? When an engine is equipped with movable counterweights, is there one per crankshaft journal, or just one or two per crankshaft, or what? If not one per journal, where are they placed? In what plane (in the geometric sense) do the movable counterweights move? I assume they are free to move in a plane perpendicular to the axis of crankshaft rotation, is that correct? How free are the movable counterweights? Is there an angular limit to their motion, or do they rotate through a full 360 degrees (with respect to their attachment point), or what? How massive are the movable counterweights, typically? What is the physics of the operation of the movable counterweights? How does their presence reduce torsional vibration? Thanks. Dave |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Dave Butler wrote: snip Is there a simple way to tell, say from the engine model number, whether an engine is equipped with the movable type of crankshaft counterweights? How are the movable type of crankshaft counterweights attached to the crankshaft? Does anyone have a picture or drawing or explanation? snip http://www.sacskyranch.com/detune.htm regards; TC |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Dave Butler wrote:
Hi, I'm not TC, but you might try looking over http://www.enginehistory.org/ for a couple papers on crank dampers. Specifically I am thinking about a story on the design of the P&W R2800 crankshaft that covers the various modes of crank bending (which the counterweights are supposed to minimize). Lycoming engines have dampers if their model number is "complex" like O-540-J1BD and don't have 'em if it's simple like O-360-A4A. The damper rolls around the inside of the hole in the crank counterweight. Sometimes the plate on the outside moves too. That's the gist of the article. When the holes get gummed up from oil coking the dampers don't move anymore and you can have problems. -- Aaron Coolidge |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Aaron Coolidge wrote:
Dave Butler wrote: Hi, I'm not TC, but you might try looking over http://www.enginehistory.org/ for a couple papers on crank dampers. Specifically I am thinking about a story on the design of the P&W R2800 crankshaft that covers the various modes of crank bending (which the counterweights are supposed to minimize). Lycoming engines have dampers if their model number is "complex" like O-540-J1BD and don't have 'em if it's simple like O-360-A4A. The damper rolls around the inside of the hole in the crank counterweight. Sometimes the plate on the outside moves too. That's the gist of the article. When the holes get gummed up from oil coking the dampers don't move anymore and you can have problems. Thanks, Aaron, Gene and TC. I may have to get a firsthand look at one of these things before the light comes on in my head. Pictures don't seem to be doing the job. Maybe next time I'm on the field with an engine shop I'll ask whether they have any engines opened up that I can look at. Anyway, your info has been helpful. Aaron, that web site looks great just for its entertainment value. Thanks for pointing it out. Dave |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Gene Kearns wrote:
Dave... email me off list... if you are local and I'll let you put hands on and go through any documentation you'd like to see.... I have samples of just about every/any thing you'd like to see... Thanks, Gene! I tried the "email me" link on your web site, but nothing happens. Maybe it has something to do with Unix and Mozilla, or the Adblock popup blocker. I'll try again when I get home to my Windoze machine. I think you're at GSO, right (you once said you could throw a rock and hit the FSDO)? I'm at RDU. Would enjoy trying to drop in on you (figuratively, of course) some time. Dave [for the benefit of non-locals GSO = Greensboro, NC, RDU = Raleigh-Durham, NC] |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Gene Kearns wrote:
On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 13:15:26 -0500, "Gene Kearns" wrote: abeam the numbers of RWY 32 at GSO! http://tinyurl.com/6vpg7 Oh... geeze.. brainfart... make that: abeam the numbers of RWY 14.... Heh, yeah, I thought so. The building where Wings Weekend events are sometimes held, right? BTW, the email link on your web site is fine (but you knew that). It was my adblock that was preventing it. Disable adblock and it works fine. Dave |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Gene Kearns wrote:
On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 11:22:47 -0500, Dave Butler wrote: BTW, the email link on your web site is fine (but you knew that). It was my adblock that was preventing it. Disable adblock and it works fine. I just caught this..... why does adblock flag my site? I don't set cookies, I host my own site, and do nothing obtrusive.... why is adblock picking on me???? Probably something to do with your site opening a new window with the email link. If you want to play with it, it's http://adblock.mozdev.org/ and the filter set I am using is from http://www.geocities.com/pierceive/adblock/ I haven't been using it long, and your site was the first time I had had any trouble. Since then, I've found there are other sites that it blocks when I don't want it to. Fortunately (I now know) it's just a couple of clicks to disable it, get what I need, then re-enable it to stop the ads. I wish it would be more discriminating in what it blocks, but now that I know to disable it whenever I can't get something I think I should, I'm OK with it. I plan to keep using it. You can play with the blocking rules to customize it, but it looks a little fussy, so I doubt I'll bother with that. I'm using it on Mozilla 1.6 and Solaris here at work, and on Firefox and Win XP at home. Dave |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Aaron and all -
Maybe more than you wanted to know................ That is an interesting site having a lot of the history of tuned absorbers. The bifilar aborber described makes the mass act like a simple one-axis pendulum. If you look at any high school physics book, the resonant frequency of a pendulum is inversely proportional to the square root of gravity (remember the l/g term under the square root sign). On the other hand the radial acceleration of a rotating mass is proportional to the square of the rotational speed. Mathematics and good Karma make the two effects cancel such that the tuned torsional natural frequency of the so-called "counterweight" (a misnomer) becomes an integral harmonic of the crankshaft rotating frequency - but only if the radius of motion of the mass is held within very narrow limits. For small motions, the effective radius of relative motion of the mass on the pins is determined by the difference between the pin OD and the wear bushing ID. That's why both wear limits are critical. Wear will always make the hole bigger and the pins smaller. The net radius of relative motion then becomes incorrect such that the resonant frequency is no longer the exact desired harmonic of the crankshaft rpm. That's when the back of the crankshaft starts vibrating a lot in torsion and the propeller also sees a lot of torsional vibration. The torsional natural frequency of most crankshaft-propeller combinations is on the gross order of about 220 Hz (almost middle C on a piano) so the pendulum length has to be very short to reduce the crankshaft stress effectively. The torsional motions are small, but a crank is so stiff that a lot of stress can be built up with even a small amount of motion. The propellor will vibrate in a slight "S" shape such that there are high stress excursions in the leading and trailing edges of the prop. One way to describe the vibration mode would be to imagine you are sitting on the rotating spinner with X-ray vision. You will get a reasonably smooth ride but the prop tips will seem to go to and fro while the back of the crankshaft goes fro and to. (Read that again) Obviously Piper was able to get by the need for RPM restrictions by stiffening the crankshaft slightly (i. e. the solid crank version) so that a damper wasn't needed on those 4 cyl installations. I'm surprised that small amount of increase in stiffness of the whole rotating structure could be enough, but at any rate, any field mixing errors in prop-engine-tachometer combinations could create a bad situation by not making original certification spec. Some times more than one frequency is needed to be absorbed, especially in 6 cyl engines. Hence the slightly different pin and bushing requirements for say the 5th and a 6 th order damper. The mass of the damper doesn't seriously enter into the tuning parameters but it is very important that the pin and bushing diameters don't become mixed up on assembly. Otherwise tuned absorbers (tuned masss dampers) are a very powerful way to supress the damaging effects of torsional vibration. Tuned absorbers are a hobby of mine. I designed the ones used to stabilize the John Hancock Tower in Boston and the CitiCorp Center in NYC against wind induced vibration. My dampers are bigger than yours..............! |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
nrp wrote:
: That is an interesting site having a lot of the history of tuned : absorbers. Yes, I was most impressed with it. I can't find the article that I was actually referring to anymore, though.. I especially liked the difficulties with the 2:1 prop reduction drive! : Obviously Piper was able to get by the need for RPM restrictions by : stiffening the crankshaft slightly (i. e. the solid crank version) so : that a damper wasn't needed on those 4 cyl installations. I'm : surprised that small amount of increase in stiffness of the whole : rotating structure could be enough, but at any rate, any field mixing : errors in prop-engine-tachometer combinations could create a bad : situation by not making original certification spec. They probably added mass & stiffness to get the resonant frequency up high enough that you'll never get there. Interestingly many medium-speed marine diesels (that is, about 500 to 800 RPM redline) have prohibited RPM ranges as well. Those engines surely have a very heavy crankshaft. : Tuned absorbers are a hobby of mine. I designed the ones used to : stabilize the John Hancock Tower in Boston and the CitiCorp Center in : NYC against wind induced vibration. My dampers are bigger than : yours..............! Wow, I am truly impressed. One of the things that drove me into the engineering field (I am an EE) was a set of pictures in my 9th grade science book showing the tuned mass damper in the Hancock tower at rest and in motion! -- Aaron C. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
O-200 Crankshaft STC for the C85 Continental ---- How's It Going? | jls | Home Built | 3 | September 30th 11 04:09 PM |
How much to replace cracked crankshaft in 1972 skyhawk O-320-E2D engine | Dave Gribble | Owning | 2 | February 4th 04 08:30 AM |
Pictures Showing WWII Rotary Engine Crankshaft Arrangements: Where, Please ? | Bob | Military Aviation | 8 | November 8th 03 06:08 PM |
0-235 C Crankshaft for sale. | LFOD76 | Home Built | 0 | August 11th 03 04:12 AM |