Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #39168
From: M Roberts <montyr2157@alltel.net>
Subject: Engine Mounts
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 22:57:31 -0500
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Bill or anyone,
I guess I need to change my question to more specifics. For example, what do you think of the single point attachment on the rear of the s-beam verses the more substantial attachment of the flat plate mount. I personally don't know if I feel comfortable with a single point of attachment in the rear. For example, there may be times when the engine gets torqued around due to sudden changes of flight direction.
Robert
 
Robert, 
 
Flight loads are really not that large. Even if you design for 10 gs you are only looking at 3000 lbs or so on the mount.
 
A more realistic number is 5 Gs.  so 1500 lbs. At that loading, each side of the mount must hold up around 750 lbs.
 
750 lbs is not much for a steel truss structure. Most mounts are hopelessly over designed. It would probably scare you to see a mount that was designed for a factor of safety of 1 for actual flight loads.
 
Stiffness is a different matter. Whirl mode oscillations can cause huge loads and are usually initiated by a perturbation flight load. So your instincts are correct to be concerned about this issue.
 
Most mounts (even poorly designed ones) will work under normal circumstances. Where you get into trouble is departure from controlled flight and turbulence.
 
So what if your engine mount weighs 5 lbs more?
 
When in doubt make it stout....(within reason) ;-)
 
Monty
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster