By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more
Forum sponsored by:
Forum sponsored by Forum House Ad Zone

Stroke

Parity between inside motion and wheels

All Topics | Latest Posts

Search for:  in Thread Title in  
David Haynes10/02/2012 18:41:38
168 forum posts
26 photos
Simple question, when does the stroke of an inside motion differ from the stroke off the wheels? I suppose there is the matter of mechanical advantage that is applied for different loco uses, but I just wondered if there was any more thinking behind it.
Dave

Edited By David Haynes on 10/02/2012 19:08:55

Stub Mandrel10/02/2012 21:36:23
avatar
4318 forum posts
291 photos
1 articles
I assume you are comparing the stroke of inside and outside cylinders on 3/4 cylinder locos?
 
If they are the same bore and pressure, then all cylinders should have the same stroke.
 
I can see that an inside cylinder could be smaller bore than outside if it had longer stroke to compensate. I can also see that there could be some careful calculations around compund cylinders..
 
If you are comparing the stroke of inside cylinders with outside connecting rods, then there is no reason why they should be the same, aside from similar stroke allows bearings to be the same size.
 
Neil
David Haynes11/02/2012 10:41:59
168 forum posts
26 photos
Thanks Neil. Yes this is in 3/4" scale, but I would have thought the issue would apply to all scales. To clarify, I am comparing the stroke of the inside piston with the 'stroke' of the coupling rods, i.e. the offset from the crank pin to the wheel centre. The prototype drawing states 'Cylinders 1' 7 1/2" Dia. 2' 2" Stroke'. This statement clearly refers to the cylinder stroke, but at no other point on the drawing, a well detailed G.A., is the driving wheel crank offset from the axle referred to. Scaling off the drawing, the offset from the c/c of the driving axle to the c/c of the big end journal is 13". So far so good, as this would give a stroke of 2'2" as indicated. However, using the same scaling, the c/c of coupling rod journal to the c/c of the associated axle, the distance comes out as 11 1/8". clearly not the same as the piston stroke. Of the few 3/4" scale drawings of inside motion I have access to, all have the same dimension for stroke and wheel crank offset. I wonder why this is?
Dave
David Haynes11/02/2012 16:02:01
168 forum posts
26 photos
Thanks for the comments.
The sectional plan shows that when the right hand (inside) connecting rod is a back dead centre, the right hand coupling rod is at front dead centre. At this position, the left hand connecting rod is at top dead centre but the left coupling rod is not shown; by deduction it will be at bottom dead centre. On the subject of balancing, the driving wheel balance weight is ahead of the crank pin slightly, on the left hand side it is about 35 degrees ahead of the crank pin. Are the left hand balance weights a mirror of the right hand? In this case, would the right hand balance be 35 degrees behind the crank pin?
Thanks again
Dave
mgj12/02/2012 08:42:12
1017 forum posts
14 photos
I would suspect that somewhere a compromise is being made, possibly to do with space available.
 
Because what has not been mentioned is torque. By having uneven throws (without a corresponding correction in cylinder area), or not having them identical, for any given chest pressure, the deliverered torque is uneven. Thats not desirable since it tends to lead to vibration and whip in the crank axle/shaft.
 
Con rods don't have to be identical length, because they just connect two points, but longer is generally better, at the cost of rigidity. You'll get differences in accelerations and  angular velocity in the bearings, and extreme differences will cause vibration, (none of which are good things) and losses because of angularity, but in principle, but as long as you connect the bit that pushes with the bit that turns it should work.

Edited By mgj on 12/02/2012 08:42:56

Edited By mgj on 12/02/2012 08:48:47

David Haynes12/02/2012 21:02:59
168 forum posts
26 photos
I have just looked at Nick Feast's Q1. He has the crank axle offset from c/c as 19mm and yet the wheel cranks are strangely 20mm from c/c.
 
Dave

All Topics | Latest Posts

Please login to post a reply.

Magazine Locator

Want the latest issue of Model Engineer or Model Engineers' Workshop? Use our magazine locator links to find your nearest stockist!

Find Model Engineer & Model Engineers' Workshop

Sign up to our Newsletter

Sign up to our newsletter and get a free digital issue.

You can unsubscribe at anytime. View our privacy policy at www.mortons.co.uk/privacy

Latest Forum Posts
Support Our Partners
cowells
Sarik
MERIDIENNE EXHIBITIONS LTD
Shopping Partners
Subscription Offer

Latest "For Sale" Ads
Latest "Wanted" Ads
Get In Touch!

Do you want to contact the Model Engineer and Model Engineers' Workshop team?

You can contact us by phone, mail or email about the magazines including becoming a contributor, submitting reader's letters or making queries about articles. You can also get in touch about this website, advertising or other general issues.

Click THIS LINK for full contact details.

For subscription issues please see THIS LINK.

Digital Back Issues

Social Media online

'Like' us on Facebook
Follow us on Facebook

Follow us on Twitter
 Twitter Logo

Pin us on Pinterest

 

Donate

donate