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

    • Well, I'm tired. I'm tired because about 4PM yesterday, before today's appointment someone immediately bought my bumper. They couldn't get it any other day as they're on the way back to NSW. So I had to do that big GTR conversion I had been planning. Unfortunately, the information on SAU about what you need and how this is done is incomplete. So what should be a simple bolt on affair, yeah, it's not. Did you know if you use all GTR items the bonnet won't close? This little manuever sent me into about 1am the night before trying to dodge a way to get it closed. I will have to revisit this in the next few days  - or maybe not, I may let a body shop figure it out. It all needs to come up and my motivation to pull the bumper off is low. It also seems to hit things in the bay where the GTT bonnet didn't. Yes I used 100% new OEM GTR items. Today, I had the joy of driving to the dyno looking like this: Given I had roughed in the fuel and given sensible but pretty conservative timing, I didn't really bet on having the car drive out any real difference than when it drove in. Sadly due to a miscommunication and laptop fun and games (and almost bricking the dongle, prayers and firmware updates indeed), I ended up using HP Tuner credits to licence the car that was already licenced. So in the end my laptop was used. It turns out my butt dyno is still well calibrated after all this time. The 325kw was on 74% Ethanol, the 313kw line was on 98. The other line is the 'before' line which was 281kw. While the numbers are pretty low, they're pretty in line with what you'd expect. Even if US dynos bump the whole result up about 50KW, gaining 10-15% is similar gains.  The curve of the cam is pretty much spot on with what was discussed as well. All this said, it still feels bad to not see the number you secretly want to see. Even if the car drove great beforehand, and I knew pretty confidently the car would drive out much the same way it drove in due to the nature of a wellish dialled in LS1 not gaining much if anything at all from being tuned from where it was. As expected, the car isn't particularly sensitive to running it at anywhere between 12.0 and 13.0 - And the initial timing at 20deg and 12.0 made 308KW. So 3 degrees of timing, and leaning it out to 12.7 for 5kw, anything above stopped giving any benefit until E85 (which has an additional 2 deg as before). Car itself behaved entirely fine. I found out that 100C = 1.15V! IAT at about 7pm was 19C. I might mess with the bonnet mounting.. but given the REO NEEDS TO BE CHOPPED TO FIT A GTR BAR this is possibly something I may leave gathering (more) dust until it returns to paint jail.
    • It sounds farrrrrrr too cold at your place Duncan... Here I was thinking our 10 degrees overnight is getting cold...
    • oh yeah, reminded this morning....bin lids frozen shut too
    • In my case not, because of total reno. But yeah.
    • Did you use an electronic speedo drive? Does you speedometer read all the way to 180km?
×
×
  • Create New...