Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #5500
From: Richard <unicorn@gdsys.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Torsionals
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 09:21:44 -0600
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Perry Mick
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2004 8:58 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Torsionals

 
 
Tracy Crook wrote:
Don't know if anyone has commented on this already Pete, but yes, the single rotor does have torque reversals. 
 
 Don't know how much of a problem this will be but the torque signature (IGNORE RPM FOR THIS COMPARISON, it doesn't matter)  will be the same as the three cylinder piston engine.  Raven had a challenging time developing a redrive for the Suzi/Geo 3 cyl. engine if that is any clue.
 
Tracy
If the two rotor is similar to a 4 cylinder 4 stroke piston engine, wouldn't a one rotor be similar to a 2 cylinder 4 stroke engine? Lamar has published the plots many times showing no torque reversals for a two rotor but very strong torque reversals for a one rotor.
-- 
Perry

Ahh yes, the never ending debate on how to compare the rotary with a piston engine.  
 
The reason I said to ignore the rpm when comparing torque signatures was to compare ONLY the relative torque amplitude variation of the engines.  The two rotor engine looks just like a 6 cylinder in this respect.  Yes, I know the 2 rotor rotary only has two power strokes per rev but they are 50% longer (270 degrees vs 180) than those of a piston engine, thus, they overlap exactly like those of a 6 cyl.  This is relavant because tortional resonance has nothing to do with rpm that the system happens to be turning.
 
The torque variation represents the amount of excitation energy fed into the system.   The higher this energy, the more critical the damper is if the system has to spend any time at or near the resonant point.   In terms of this excitation energy, the one rotor probably has double or more  the amount that a 2 rotor has (all else being equal).  Notice that this excitation energy is not directly related to engine horsepower.
 
Somehow I doubt that I have made things any clearer.
 
Tracy
Yes it does make it clearer, thanks. I thought about that after I posted the last message (maybe I just reread your previous message!). It is clear that the PSRU will be under more "stress" with a one-rotor. Has anyone ever bolted your PSRU to a one-rotor? Do you even approve it for a one-rotor?
-- 
Perry
 
Obviously, I am working on that for my One-Rotor.
There is a list of design features influenced by the running characteristics of the engine. To name only a few - flywheel, idle speed, flex coupler, redrive - have an influence on the impact of torque dynamics. I can not say at this stage of development what the solutions will look like. One observation I made on the POP engine on the test stand was, the attachment of the load prop to its shaft had to be better then a couple of big set screws. It had to be taken out after two runs (5Min) and I added a regular key to it. And that in spite ot a simple industrial rubber coupler.
The good news is, that all this was test stand set up using HDW mostly picked out of my junk boxes.
Nevertheless, the data will not be ignored.
 
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster