|
|
Hi Fred,
I wish I knew what your saying!
I nearly got the single beat, but realistically speaking a dynamic balance
is the only way to go.
I would suggest for chaps who are serious about smoothness and therefore
balance, getting the two rotor balanced is a must if their mixing parts.
It does add some extra cost but in the overall scheme of things it solves
the problem - provided you can find someone who knows what their doing.
George ( down under)
In a message dated 04/15/05 21:39 EDT Lehanover@aol.com writes:
"In the single rotor, the whole rig is going to be dynamically balanced,
so the
two counter weights will equal the weight of the rotor exactly."
Please forgive my delay in commenting on the above. It took several days
for
me to work up the courage to dispute anything posted by Lynn Hanover whose
experience and knowledge place him at the very top level of the Rotary
Gods.
How's that for kissing up (;-)?
In a single rotor the counter weights must statically balance out the
unbalance
of the eccentric shaft PLUS the rotor, its attachments, and cooling oil.
IN
ADDITION, they must do so without creating a longitudinal or rocking
couple that
will generate a dynamic unbalance. In other words, the CG plane of the
counter
weight combination must fall exactly on the CG plane of the unbalance
they are
correcting. If not, the spinning assembly will try to wobble.
I realize this is a bit of a quibble but with the increasing interest in
single rotor
engines there should be adequate recognition that balancing one is not
easy.
Balance Diagram courtesy of PL's ACRE NL.
With all due reverence, Lynn.
Fred O.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
>> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
|
|