|
|
----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Ruttan" <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2004 10:51 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Shertz Beam
So it's your fault it has that horrible name? :)
Unfortunately, yes
The idea seems a little different, so I wanted a bunch of eyes to take a
look. My buddy tells me the same idea is used on his contentinal.
I have posted pictures of the mount at www.canardaviation.com/forum
A direct link to the post tinyurl.com/2ms2d
Some folks there had some questions, and some seemed a little critical.
They are a frendly sort, but I think they need an explination. Feel free
to
respond to their questions, if you wish.
I only have pictures of the beam itself, although Paul posted a pic with a
rear mount show.
Do you have any pictures of the "third mount".
I posted a picture of what I "think" will work, on the other list.
Do you see any weekness in the mount, compared to a bed mount?
Can you explain how it will handel gyroscopic loads?
Mine needs to have the side tabs welded on like Jerry Hey is doing
Do you see any reasong not to put it in a canard pusher?
Being that it is 'experimental', no difference that I can see.
Do you have your origional pictures I could post there?
I have to dig some out.
I have talked to Jerry and I am looking forward to getting his production
mount.
Driving ahis truck onto his mount does it for me.
ME TOO.
----- Original Message ----- From: "William" <wschertz@ispwest.com>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2004 10:13 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Shertz Beam
> Eric,
> When I put together the prototype of the motor mount, I posted pictures
to
> both lists, I think. At the time of designing it, I did stress
calculations
> on different 'beams' to find a combination of dimensions and materials
that
> would put the bending stresses into an acceptable range. I settled on
0.065
> wall rectangular tubing measuring 2" x 1". I wanted to mount the oil
cooler
> below the motor mount beam for easy access to air.
>
> The further work that Jerry Hey has done, making it a 'hat section'
allows
> easier fabrication, and he is statically loading the beam to test it,
which
> I did not.
>
> BTW, I did not name the mount.
>
> Bill Schertz
> KIS Cruiser # 4045
> ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Eric Ruttan" <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 10:11 PM
> Subject: [FlyRotary] Shertz Beam
>
>
> > I have examined the "Shertz Beam" Motor mount on "the other" Mail
List.
> >
> > Searched and did not find a comment on this list.
> >
> > Other than it is recomended by "The Other" list, is there anything
wrong
> > with it?
> >
> > I am looking for solid/semi solid engineering critique. I really dont
> want
> > to talk about "feelings" or "preferance".
> >
> > Thans for your time.
> >
> >
> >
> > >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
> > >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
>
>
> >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
> >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
>> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
|
|