Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hah, realized where I went wrong. Just asked dad what the deal was and he told me his prop tacho in the glider is from another aircraft which used a different gear ratio, so this one's readings are well off :blush: He knows the equation to work out it's true speed, but really he just uses it to monitor the 'norm' for prop-slip.

So my example is not as relevant as I thought, but I think the main point of the strength of nylon is still valid.

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I just calculated the tip speed of a 1m diameter prop at 200,000 rpm at over 600 km/h. So there is definitely something not right there.

Care to calculate the tip-speed of a 1.63 meter diameter prop, alt. of 10,000 feet; engine speed of 5000rpm, prop pitch of 137.6cm and a gear ratio of 1.18? Those are the specs of dad's Stemme. Dad gave me the formula to work it out, but I tried it and got lost lol.

I must be on drugs. I wouldn't trust the 600 km/h speed I reported earlier. I did it in Excel and it looked good and so I posted and then closed the spreadsheet. So to answer your question I had to redo the calc and the numbers came out quite different. I must have divided something when I was supposed to multiply it I think. Anyway, the answer for 80000rpm by 1m prop is more like 15000 km/h, which is of course totally stupid. For your 1.63m propeller at 5000 rpm x 1.18 (=5900 rpm) the tip speed is about 1800 km/h. Which is also silly, because supersonic tip speed are not kosher. Even if I got your gear ratio back to front and the prop speed is only 5000 / 1.18 (=4237 rpm), then the tip speed is still 1300 km/h. I don't like that answer either. The altitude and the prop pitch don't impact on the tip speed. Tip speed is just how many times per second the tip completes each circle, multiplied by the length of the circumference. 1.63m diameter is 5.1m around. 5900 rpm is 98.3 revs per second. Multiply number of turns by distance and you get 503 m/s tip speed, which is 1812km/h. Nasty. Now, if by chance I read your gear ratio really wrong, and there is actually an 18:1 reduction from engine to prop shaft, then the tip speed is 85 km/h, which seems really far too low. I went and googled up a tip speed calculator, http://www.pponk.com/HTML%20PAGES/propcalc.html which seems to suggest that 0.9 mach is the optimum tip speed. I put your dimensions into it and it came back with >900mph (mach 1.5) as the tip speed (at 5900 rpm) and said don't do it. So that agrees with my calcs. I don't know what to say about your tip speed. I don't like the answer, so maybe one of the inputs is wrong.

Care to calculate the tip-speed of a 1.63 meter diameter prop, alt. of 10,000 feet; engine speed of 5000rpm, prop pitch of 137.6cm and a gear ratio of 1.18? Those are the specs of dad's Stemme. Dad gave me the formula to work it out, but I tried it and got lost lol.

Vtip = πdn

Where d is the diameter in metres, and n is the angular velocity (RPM).

=3.14 * 1.63 * (5000 * 1.18)

=30212.69m/min

=1812.76km/h

1812.76km/h at the tip on a 1.63m prop at 5000 engine RPM's through a 1.18x gearbox in a standard atmosphere. You sure about those figures?? When a prop is operated so it's tip exceeds mach ~0.88 (934km/h), it's efficiency starts to go downhill due to the loss of laminar airflow over the aerofoil; shockwaves that interrupt the thrust being generated. Back to the drawing board for you Hanaldo! lol

Just for shits'n, I took the liberty of calculating the same prop's tip speed, but at 200000RPM.....

Over Mach 49. :3

I must be on drugs. I wouldn't trust the 600 km/h speed I reported earlier. I did it in Excel and it looked good and so I posted and then closed the spreadsheet. So to answer your question I had to redo the calc and the numbers came out quite different. I must have divided something when I was supposed to multiply it I think. Anyway, the answer for 80000rpm by 1m prop is more like 15000 km/h, which is of course totally stupid. For your 1.63m propeller at 5000 rpm x 1.18 (=5900 rpm) the tip speed is about 1800 km/h. Which is also silly, because supersonic tip speed are not kosher. Even if I got your gear ratio back to front and the prop speed is only 5000 / 1.18 (=4237 rpm), then the tip speed is still 1300 km/h. I don't like that answer either. The altitude and the prop pitch don't impact on the tip speed. Tip speed is just how many times per second the tip completes each circle, multiplied by the length of the circumference. 1.63m diameter is 5.1m around. 5900 rpm is 98.3 revs per second. Multiply number of turns by distance and you get 503 m/s tip speed, which is 1812km/h. Nasty. Now, if by chance I read your gear ratio really wrong, and there is actually an 18:1 reduction from engine to prop shaft, then the tip speed is 85 km/h, which seems really far too low. I went and googled up a tip speed calculator, http://www.pponk.com...S/propcalc.html which seems to suggest that 0.9 mach is the optimum tip speed. I put your dimensions into it and it came back with >900mph (mach 1.5) as the tip speed (at 5900 rpm) and said don't do it. So that agrees with my calcs. I don't know what to say about your tip speed. I don't like the answer, so maybe one of the inputs is wrong.

You're correct, altitude only comes into when trying to work out tip mach speed.

I just googled the Stemme 10 specs, and the manual gives the same specs as I gave you. Maybe there is another gear set somewhere along the line which gives another reduction that isn't mentioned? I have no idea, I'm confused now :/ I know for a fact the engine is revved to 5000rpm on take-off, that was drilled into me when I was learning to fly it. Cruising rpm is more around 2400.

the rotax engine itself has an integral reduction gear too...i mentioned it earlier was 1:2.2 something

so the prop will be running through 2 gearboxes, 1 at the motor and 1 in the prop hub

The Rotax is out of the S10 VT, dad has an S10 VH-GTS which uses a Limbach L2400 motor. The only specs I can find on that motor are from a Stemme S10-V, but that's an L-2400 EB1.AD motor which is different to dad's. I can guarantee that at 3400rpm, there is no way dad's glider would get off the ground.

In any case the RPM is quite irrelevant to the earlier point; would everyone here agree that 90% of mach 1 is pretty stressful operating conditions?

Because I haven't seen it in real life I am going to call you a wanker and not believe you.

not really - I still ahven't seen a plastic compressor, even though I have visually inspected a few GTT and GTS-T turbos.

If you want to keep crapping on about shit thinking your winning, good for you. Whatever makes you sleep better at night.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Ok cool, because I do have some OEM BMW options for light(er) wheels. 17x8.5 M Sport wheels are 11kg and I could put 255's on them. Maybe that's an initial test.
    • So, in the effort of pulling apart airboxes and testing enclosures to see if this aids in MAP loss at WOT I noticed: 1) The ducts up the OEM intercooler holes from the front bar help IAT drastically, whether the pod is shielded from the engine bay by an airbox missing a lid, or an airbox WITH a lid. Plus you get more induction sound without the lid. Having half the airbox (with no lid) acting as a barrier to the headers seems to help. 2) For shits and giggles I checked the TB. This was full pedal travel. This is actually full travel of the TB. Photos aren't perfect, but there was definitely an amount of play in it and it wasn't against the stop. After much swearing and adjusting the pedal, I realised that the cable is actually too long for the skyline pedal travel to fully articulate it. Having the pedal adjusted so WOT was actually hard open on WOT resulted in an idle of 3500rpm. As an aside, this was also the TPS registering at 3.1%. I removed the above to give the pedal enough travel to actually fully open the TB. I now get a satisfying 'thonk' on full open and full closed which you can hear pumping the pedal as it hits the TB stops (with the bonnet open and intake back on). Luckily for me, the screw screws into a raised metal boss under this plastic piece that is now acting as the new throttle stop. I've gained about 20mm (ish) of pedal travel and I can move it maybe a mm or two post open-thonk before it's hard against the stop. After all of this I did a bit of road tuning because a 102MM throttle is sensitive. The difference between holding an 950rpm idle and instantly stalling is about 0.4% of TPS movement. Will that help? I suppose it can't hurt. I set 'closed' point back to where it was, I can definitely feel the extra pedal travel that is needed to actually open the TB fully. But this morning I dropped the car off at Paint Jail again, so who knows when this will re-eventuate out to see if it helps with the top of the dyno hitting a ceiling.
    • Take heart that everyone else seems to have found a way. The OEM S1 indicators do slot in pretty firmly. It may simply be a case of having them sit slightly looser and nobody actually ever noticed this when attempting to remove a indicator from a JSAI bar :p
    • If the original NA ECU has a separate TCU then you are going to need to reroute wires that used to run between the trans and the TCU to the appropriate (1 to 1 equivalent) pins on the ECU. Other than that, it should work. Look up posts by @Kinkstaah on the subject.
    • So the stagea was a series 2 neo det with tiptronic auto. (I have the transmission aswell) and has integrated tcu in the ecu. I'm hoping to use the entire stagea ecu, engine and auto harness. 
×
×
  • Create New...