Return-Path: Received: from [216.52.245.18] (HELO ispwestemail1.mdeinc.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2b3) with ESMTP id 86488 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 23 May 2004 23:20:40 -0400 Received: from 7n7z201 (unverified [67.136.145.198]) by ispwestemail1.mdeinc.com (Vircom SMTPRS 3.1.300.2) with SMTP id for ; Sun, 23 May 2004 20:20:37 -0700 Message-ID: <15eb01c4413e$10e86520$c8918843@7n7z201> From: "William" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re:Beam Motor Mount Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 22:20:28 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_15E8_01C44114.271C3D50" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_15E8_01C44114.271C3D50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The need for the side bolts was pointed out by an alert reader on one of = these lists -- that is what I like, the instant feedback that allows = evolution. Now I just have to get the welding done. Bill Schertz KIS Cruiser # 4045 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Tracy Crook=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2004 5:08 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Beam Motor Mount (semi-long) Good points Bill and I fully agree that the Shertz Beam is infinitely = preferable to the 'Mount on the adapter plate' scheme. The only point which truly affects safety is the point about stress on = the bolts. In the original configuration, the six bolts are all in a = row and going on 'gut feel' stress analysis, this will result in >=3D = 90% of the force in tension being placed on a single 6mm bolt (the one = on the end). If this bolt fails, the rest of them would break in quick = succession. The geometry is such that the force will increase as the = next bolt in line will see an ever increasing load as the one outboard = of it fails. The fix that you proposed (tying the beam to more bolts along the side = of the engine) should work well and this removes any concern I had about = its safety as long as the rear mount is properly handled. This is much = easier on composite structures than on 'beer can' designs. Tracy Crook ------=_NextPart_000_15E8_01C44114.271C3D50 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The need for the side bolts was pointed out by = an alert=20 reader on one of these lists -- that is what I like, the instant = feedback that=20 allows evolution. Now I just have to get the welding done.
Bill Schertz
KIS Cruiser # 4045
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Tracy = Crook
Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2004 5:08 = PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Beam = Motor Mount=20 (semi-long)

Good points Bill and I fully agree that the Shertz Beam is = infinitely=20 preferable to the 'Mount on the adapter plate' scheme.
 
The only point which truly affects safety is the point about = stress on=20 the bolts.  In the original configuration, the six bolts are all = in a row=20 and going on 'gut feel' stress analysis, this will result in = >=3D=20 90%  of the force in tension being placed on a single 6mm bolt = (the one=20 on the end).  If this bolt fails, the rest of them would break in = quick=20 succession. The geometry is such that the force will increase as the = next bolt=20 in line will see an ever increasing load as the one outboard of it=20 fails.
 
The fix that you proposed (tying the beam to more bolts along the = side of=20 the engine) should work well and this removes any concern I = had=20 about its safety as long as the rear mount is properly handled.  = This is=20 much easier on composite structures than on 'beer can' designs.
 
Tracy Crook
------=_NextPart_000_15E8_01C44114.271C3D50--