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
|
|||
|
|||
Suction mounts on a canopy
A small amount of spit for a seal and do it while the air is at low
pressure eg while as high up as possible. Well, seems this works fine, I have just tried this technique on a 3.5 hours flight up to 7000 feet. Suction mount fell off after 30 minutes of flight (after being attached on the ground), but it didn't fell off after being attached on 7000 feet! I'll try water instead of spit next time. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Suction mounts on a canopy
I use one of Paul's suction cups to hold my iPAQ. I use a little water
from my Camelback to wet the cup before attaching. I try to make sure I press down all around the cup and squeeze out as much air as possible. I'm also attaching to the lower edge of a 1-26 canopy, so there is not a lot of curvature at the point of attachment. I've installed it at 7000' and flown to 18,000 and back without it coming off, including flights of 5+ hours. I generally have to pull on the edge of the cup and peel it off to remove it. John Scott wrote in message ups.com... I read somewhere that water will work better than spit, and my own experience reinforces this. I can't explain why, but try water instead of spit. Fred |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Suction mounts and damage potential
Hokey science alert:
I'd reason that the most pressure the atmosphere can exert on the outside of the canopy, even with a true vacuum in the suction cup, is atmospheric pressure - about 1kg/cm^2. A fingertip has about 1cm^2 of area, so to gain a feel for the scale of what we're talking about, try pressing down on kitchen scales with one finger until the scale reads 1kg ( 2.2lb / 35oz / 5.47 standard Hungarian apples). Not inconsiderable, but (I would have thought) not enough to risk damage of any kind. To test this theory more thoroughly, you could try wandering over to a glider on the flight line and exerting the same pressure with a finger on the canopy. I'd wager no localised distortions will be inflicted - at least, not on the canopy. Simon PS As a disclaimer: My entire knowledge of physics is based upon observations I made watching hollywood movies. PPS Steven Seagal movies. At 01:48 12 April 2007, Paul Remde wrote: Hi Bernie, I doubt it would crack a canopy. My fear (founded or unfounded) is that the localized deformation of the canopy would lead to internal crazing - especially in extremely hot or cold conditions. I just wouldn't want to risk a $2000 to $5000 glider canopy. Paul Remde 'Bernie' wrote in message oups.com... Has anyone ever seen a canopy cracked by a 'lever-action' suction device? You've got me worried now .......... |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Suction mounts and damage potential
Hi Simon,
I don't think the issue is how much pressure the outside air pressure can put upon the outside of the canopy. The issue is that the suction cup is shaped like a ... well... a cup. It has enough force to pull the canopy to form to the shape of the inside of the cup. That causes local stresses on the canopy. It may or may not be a visible deformation. Paul Remde "Simon Taylor" wrote in message ... Hokey science alert: I'd reason that the most pressure the atmosphere can exert on the outside of the canopy, even with a true vacuum in the suction cup, is atmospheric pressure - about 1kg/cm^2. A fingertip has about 1cm^2 of area, so to gain a feel for the scale of what we're talking about, try pressing down on kitchen scales with one finger until the scale reads 1kg ( 2.2lb / 35oz / 5.47 standard Hungarian apples). Not inconsiderable, but (I would have thought) not enough to risk damage of any kind. To test this theory more thoroughly, you could try wandering over to a glider on the flight line and exerting the same pressure with a finger on the canopy. I'd wager no localised distortions will be inflicted - at least, not on the canopy. Simon PS As a disclaimer: My entire knowledge of physics is based upon observations I made watching hollywood movies. PPS Steven Seagal movies. At 01:48 12 April 2007, Paul Remde wrote: Hi Bernie, I doubt it would crack a canopy. My fear (founded or unfounded) is that the localized deformation of the canopy would lead to internal crazing - especially in extremely hot or cold conditions. I just wouldn't want to risk a $2000 to $5000 glider canopy. Paul Remde 'Bernie' wrote in message roups.com... Has anyone ever seen a canopy cracked by a 'lever-action' suction device? You've got me worried now .......... |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Suction mounts and damage potential
Another thing to consider is that when parked in direct sun, the plexi over
the suction cup will get a lot hotter than the surrounding canopy. This will cause thermal stress as well. bumper "Paul Remde" wrote in message news:MqxTh.50146$oV.12792@attbi_s21... Hi Simon, I don't think the issue is how much pressure the outside air pressure can put upon the outside of the canopy. The issue is that the suction cup is shaped like a ... well... a cup. It has enough force to pull the canopy to form to the shape of the inside of the cup. That causes local stresses on the canopy. It may or may not be a visible deformation. Paul Remde "Simon Taylor" wrote in message ... Hokey science alert: I'd reason that the most pressure the atmosphere can exert on the outside of the canopy, even with a true vacuum in the suction cup, is atmospheric pressure - about 1kg/cm^2. A fingertip has about 1cm^2 of area, so to gain a feel for the scale of what we're talking about, try pressing down on kitchen scales with one finger until the scale reads 1kg ( 2.2lb / 35oz / 5.47 standard Hungarian apples). Not inconsiderable, but (I would have thought) not enough to risk damage of any kind. To test this theory more thoroughly, you could try wandering over to a glider on the flight line and exerting the same pressure with a finger on the canopy. I'd wager no localised distortions will be inflicted - at least, not on the canopy. Simon PS As a disclaimer: My entire knowledge of physics is based upon observations I made watching hollywood movies. PPS Steven Seagal movies. At 01:48 12 April 2007, Paul Remde wrote: Hi Bernie, I doubt it would crack a canopy. My fear (founded or unfounded) is that the localized deformation of the canopy would lead to internal crazing - especially in extremely hot or cold conditions. I just wouldn't want to risk a $2000 to $5000 glider canopy. Paul Remde 'Bernie' wrote in message groups.com... Has anyone ever seen a canopy cracked by a 'lever-action' suction device? You've got me worried now .......... |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Suction mounts and damage potential
Hi Paul,
As I understand it there will be no pulling force acting on the inside of the canopy. This is admittedly counter-intuitive to anyone who tried the following bored-in-science-lab experiment; if we place a pipette against our skin and release the nipple, our skin feels as if it is being pulled towards the low pressure. In fact the higher pressure inside our flesh is pushing our flexible skin towards the low pressure area. Back to gliding, which always tends to distance itself from the world of skin and nipples, this does imply that any minute pockets of trapped air in the canopy might pull- sorry, might cause the very insidemost parts of the canopy to be PUSHED in towards the low pressure within the suction cup, potentially damaging the canopy. However, I presume such pockets don't exist; there would be visible depressions in the canopy where these pockets had cooled after the forming of the canopy, and any such pockets would be just/almost as prone to deforming the canopy during a high wave flight. Without the existance of air pockets, I reckon the situation would be just as I described before - complete with disclaimer.. Simon At 21:24 12 April 2007, Paul Remde wrote: Hi Simon, I don't think the issue is how much pressure the outside air pressure can put upon the outside of the canopy. The issue is that the suction cup is shaped like a ... well... a cup. It has enough force to pull the canopy to form to the shape of the inside of the cup. That causes local stresses on the canopy. It may or may not be a visible deformation. Paul Remde |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Suction mounts and damage potential
Just so we all agree on the laws of physics, any force exerted on the
canopy by a suction cup is due to the differential in pressure on one side of the plex vs. the other. trapped air bubbles in the plex would not have an effect. air pressure at sea level is about 14.7 PSI. Assuming the suction cup pulled a perfect vacuum (unlikely) and it had a diameter of 2", then the maximum possible force would be: Pi*D*14.7=92.4 lbs of force. Not insignificant. Another way to look at this is that it would require 95 lbs of force to pull the suction cup off the canopy. At 6000' atmospheric pressure drops to about 12 psi, yielding 75lbs of force. Still pretty high. Note that deflection of the canopy in this area would be pretty small, but stress internal to the material would be high. Low temperatures, UV exposure, etc would exacerbate the issue. In reality, a suction cup probably doesn't come anywhere close to pulling a perfect vacuum, so the numbers would be much lower, but I couldn't guess how much. I can't offer any analysis on skin/nipple distances. Matt (jr) On Apr 13, 4:03 am, Simon Taylor wrote: Back to gliding, which always tends to distance itself from the world of skin and nipples, this does imply that any minute pockets of trapped air in the canopy might pull- sorry, might cause the very insidemost parts of the canopy to be PUSHED in towards the low pressure within the suction cup, potentially damaging the canopy. However, I presume such pockets don't exist; there would be visible depressions in the canopy where these pockets had cooled after the forming of the canopy, and any such pockets would be just/almost as prone to deforming the canopy during a high wave flight. Without the existance of air pockets, I reckon the situation would be just as I described before - complete with disclaimer.. the canopy. It may or may not be a visible deformation. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Suction mounts and damage potential
Why is the maximum possible force Pi*D*14.7 ?
"Matt Herron Jr." wrote in message ups.com... Just so we all agree on the laws of physics, any force exerted on the canopy by a suction cup is due to the differential in pressure on one side of the plex vs. the other. trapped air bubbles in the plex would not have an effect. air pressure at sea level is about 14.7 PSI. Assuming the suction cup pulled a perfect vacuum (unlikely) and it had a diameter of 2", then the maximum possible force would be: Pi*D*14.7=92.4 lbs of force. Not insignificant. Another way to look at this is that it would require 95 lbs of force to pull the suction cup off the canopy. At 6000' atmospheric pressure drops to about 12 psi, yielding 75lbs of force. Still pretty high. Note that deflection of the canopy in this area would be pretty small, but stress internal to the material would be high. Low temperatures, UV exposure, etc would exacerbate the issue. In reality, a suction cup probably doesn't come anywhere close to pulling a perfect vacuum, so the numbers would be much lower, but I couldn't guess how much. I can't offer any analysis on skin/nipple distances. Matt (jr) On Apr 13, 4:03 am, Simon Taylor wrote: Back to gliding, which always tends to distance itself from the world of skin and nipples, this does imply that any minute pockets of trapped air in the canopy might pull- sorry, might cause the very insidemost parts of the canopy to be PUSHED in towards the low pressure within the suction cup, potentially damaging the canopy. However, I presume such pockets don't exist; there would be visible depressions in the canopy where these pockets had cooled after the forming of the canopy, and any such pockets would be just/almost as prone to deforming the canopy during a high wave flight. Without the existance of air pockets, I reckon the situation would be just as I described before - complete with disclaimer.. the canopy. It may or may not be a visible deformation. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Suction mounts and damage potential
John Wilton wrote:
Why is the maximum possible force Pi*D*14.7 ? Physics 101. Area of the suction cup in sq. in. multiplied by atmospheric pressure at sea level. -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org | |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Suction mounts and damage potential
Martin Gregorie wrote:
John Wilton wrote: Why is the maximum possible force Pi*D*14.7 ? Physics 101. Area of the suction cup in sq. in. multiplied by atmospheric pressure at sea level. John, the formula for area is Pi*r*r. Pi*d is circumference. I'm not a physicist, but I think you're looking at this problem all wrong. Which is rigid, the canopy or the suction cup? The suction cup which Paul was recommending earlier is soft rubber. So the deformation is there. The only force on the canopy is that caused by the deformation of the rubber, plus the torque or weight applied to the mount. I happen to have that suction cup in my hand right now, and I estimate that it takes about 10 pounds of force to compress it. Then, after compression, that same 10 pounds is trying to spring back, but is being prevented by the vacuum. This load is continuously applied as a bending load trying to deform a disk of plexiglass the size of the cup. Plexiglass is pretty stiff, I've never seen any deformation of the canopy when the cup is on. I'm certain that at no time is the stress greater than when you apply the cup. If one were to put their hand on the outside of the canopy at the same time to provide counter pressure, that stress could be reduced to almost nil. That cup is 4 inches in diameter, or 2 inches radius. The release force would be 2*2*3.14*14.7, or about 185 pounds, assuming the suction was perfect. Now, my Dell Axim which I use this way weighs about 1/2 pound, and when hooked to the cup, it has a moment arm of about 6 inches with the mount I bought from Paul. That's 1/2 pound * 1/2 foot, or 1/4 foot pound of torque being applied to the mount. And, I don't think that is increasing the overall force exerted, it's just redistributing the 10 pounds of compression force over the disk area. And if you put the suction cup on properly, there is almost no air inside there, certainly less than 10%, so it is probably 90% of a perfect vacuum. Now, it you tried to pull the suction cup straight off, that would apply the maximum force to the canopy, and as the cup started to pull off, the volume inside would try to increase, making the vacuum even greater. But if you remove it by pulling the little tab, then it's released with almost no force because the vacuum is broken. The bottom line for me in this is that I think I'd be most careful when installing and removing the cup. I won't worry too much about the loads it applies in use. Ed |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Lycoming O-360 oil suction screen torque | [email protected] | Owning | 8 | August 19th 06 07:52 PM |
PDA suction mount? | Bernie Baer | Soaring | 7 | August 17th 06 02:21 AM |
G-force vs. Ram GPS suction mount | [email protected] | Piloting | 9 | October 20th 05 10:51 PM |
Suction mounts for Garmin 296 | Ekim | Piloting | 5 | June 25th 05 10:55 AM |
Effect of suction on DG | Jay Honeck | Owning | 6 | March 3rd 04 01:12 PM |