Is Taylor a useful reference for racing engine design?

[Kevin Johnson]

Aside: Erland, sorry about internet wars. This is important.

Jon, I think the problem is that you are not used to doing academic research.

In Taylor's bibilography, for example, he lists many sources for one to follow up and cross check his meta-analysis. I will select one that readers here can access:

11.711 Walstrom Measurement of Operating Stresses in an Aircraft Engine under Power

This report is available here: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi. ... 093133.pdf

When you read that report you can check its references. One that is available online is here: http://dome.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/17 ... sequence=1

There are two reports for you that give dynamic testing of engines with hollowed pins and mains while in operation.

Doing research is time consuming. It is real work. Not everyone wants to do it. That is abundantly clear.

You don't find patterns in your data because you are being sloppy in your analysis and you are excluding vast amounts of data that would be very important in the general behavior of the system that you wish to perturb. I wish there was a golden road (an old physics teacher used that expression) but mostly it is just plain hard work and tedious as well. And as you have discovered, the program is not going to do your thinking for you. Not yet, anyway. Maybe next week.

It was not obvious to you that hollowing was used to increase strength rather than lightening or some side effect of creating normal surfaces for a drill bit to obtain purchase. Or a way to decrease the weight of crankshafts so that the Luftwaffe could use the 1930s equivalent of UPS or FedEx to ship their crankshafts.

That's the problem Kevin, he reported on a small # of tests with conflicting results on cranks made to dimensional proportions, material and loads that are not relevant to a modern racing crank.
We now have many thousands of examples of racing cranks with and without holes (and some cranks with holes in some journals and not in others) and no pattern to indicate that they increase strength.
I read that about holes while we were making fixtures to make our 1st run of cranks and the idea interested me a little but I looked around to see what it did in the places it was used and it didn't do anything.
I also read books about counterweight design from the same era, they also turned out to be wrong.

I have already explained this to you yet you continue to repeat it.

[SchmidtMotorWorks]

Again how many times do I have to repeat it 1945 IS NOT RELEVANT TO A RACING ENGINE OF DIFFERENT PROPORTIONS, MATERIALS and LOADS!

SHOW ME WHERE IT IS MAKING A DIFFERENCE TODAY!

WE HAVE CRANKS OF SIMILAR PROPORTIONS, WITH AND WITHOUT LIGHTENING HOLES, THE ONES WITH HOLES DO NOT PROVE TO BE STRONGER.

Holy crap Kevin, I read far enough into how they measured the stress to know that their data was meaningless compared to what we have today. What a ridiculous waste of time! You call that research?

If I brought that up at work without duplicating the test in FEA before wasting anyone's time with it they would call a paramedic, if I was OK, they would fire me;

Why not find something modern?

Just guessing, the answer is because you won't find the same answer.

[SchmidtMotorWorks]

And as you have discovered, the program is not going to do your thinking for you. Not yet, anyway. Maybe next week.

Your girlish quips are getting rather lame, insinuating that I just type numbers into someone else program and templates and take the results as the final answer.

As I have explained to you, I have written my own software for cam design, it is the best that I know of in regards to quality of output and control. You haven't been able to produce any research showing an algorithm that is even modern let alone better than mine. The fact is much of (probably most) the best technology isn't published.

[SchmidtMotorWorks]

So you are more interested in Internet wars than testing a chamber?
That's not progress.

Erland

I'm not where my CAD workstation is.

can you do it when you get there?
Believe me, I didn't have to think a lot to ask that question.


Erland

I'm taking the kids skiing, I won't be home until Sunday night, I can try to do it then if I don't get home too late.

[SchmidtMotorWorks]

Aside: Erland, sorry about internet wars. This is important.

Jon, I think the problem is that you are not used to doing academic research.

For someone that goes on and on about research, you sure choose to cite some real garbage.

Time to man up and admit the references you posted in regards to crankshafts, if followed, would make junk as racing cranks.

[Erland Cox]

I'm taking the kids skiing, I won't be home until Sunday night, I can try to do it then if I don't get home too late.

Do it whenever you have the time, I would be very grateful.
And I believe it could be quite interesting to all others here on the forum.

Erland

[justahoby]

Old ways work... we flew to the moon in 1969... russians sent monkeys to space in the 50s, they lived. Our machinig and measuring methods aren't as sophisticated as today,, even Nasa has moved on even though they were light years ahead then.
But just because old methods work , and in 1896 some Swedish man Carl Edvard Johansson, invented gauge blocks to the millionth of an inch by years of buffing them to millionths of an inch doesn't mean we do that today.
Rules of metrology have been refined. We produce things faster, better, and at less cost, pull them out of a machine to the 0.000001" once they are at 68 F, after 3 hours.
Having a crank at 23 rockwell would need a flame hardened surface for wear, but not so much today with strength and perfection of what is produced.. I could see hardly how that info would apply today, but i am sure it could find a spot at the smithsonian. We aren't driving flathead Fords.
The problem with our country is we think we know it all. At one time we did.. 50 years ago the Japanese took pictures of what we had, and produced it as they could.They originally learned from us.... took their crap cars, by the late 70s made them ok.. now with refinement and standards they marched ahead, and their shit boxes by mid 80s stopped rusting to the ground... maybe because we still look at Taylors book, and build the same thing over and over.. We get stuck in our own ways... Typical Asshole americans we are.. now until recent years we had to play catch up.... our waste , quality control methods, standards and use of universal methods had to be refined.

[Steve Salesky]

Need drives innovation. For all the bad of WWII much innovation and invention came out of it. I think the problem here is we have a guy (Kevin Johnson) who gets all his information from books while sitting in his ivory tower and is abstracted from the real world sucking up whatever information and knowledge from books, etc... can be useful, but how it is actually of use or applicable to the real world requires understanding of the needs and requirements of each application. Not everything translates or works. This is why innovation comes from need, as need drives actually doing something other than theorizing in the abstract.

I must commend Mr. Schmidt as he has a lot of patients. One would have better results talking to a wall then Kevin Johnson. In an earlier post Mr. Johnson used the words "dedicated student" and at the root of the problem is he thinks like a student. Only willing to suck in information from others, but not willing to think for himself, gain experience in the art, and become a master in the art. Instead all he does is argue over others work and words as to who is right. Is a waste of time IMO.

[JoePorting]

In terms of all the technology talk...I think all the technology is interesting, but doesn't seem to produce the big results you'd think. I've always noticed that people who talk up technology "talk the talk" about efficiency and improvement, but the technology doesn't seem to "walk the walk". For example, the common pick-up truck in the 1950's probably got 12 to 15 mpg. After all the technical improvements over the past 60 years, the same basic trucks get 20 to 22 mpg. Not a big improvement. If the tech was as good as people say, the same truck should be getting 60 to 70 mpg. The tech just seems to be being pushed by the tech economy who are just trying to sell us a better toaster. The one area of improvement has been the emission area, but I think the improvments could have been done without all the tech. One could make an economic argument... that with cheap gas there was no incentive to improve gas milage. But with gas at $4 a gallon for the past 5 years, I've been very unimpressed by any technical advancements in the ICE.

[Kevin Johnson]

Aside: Erland, sorry about internet wars. This is important.

Jon, I think the problem is that you are not used to doing academic research.

For someone that goes on and on about research, you sure choose to cite some real garbage.

Time to man up and admit the references you posted in regards to crankshafts, if followed, would make junk as racing cranks.

Prepare for some more real garbage.

When I checked out Taylor I also checked out the Standard Handbook of Machine Design by Shigley and Mischke, 1986 Volumes 1 and 2. In Chapter 13 Mischke mentions in 13-3-6 miscellaneous influences on fatigue strength, including induction hardening. The suggestion is that the fatigue strength factor associated with these processes are largely detrimental but that "they are not well understood quantitativly in any comprehensive way".

Moving to:

Subsurface fatigue crack initiation and propagation behavior of induction-hardened shafts under the effect of residual and applied bending stresses by
Zhang, Stephens & Glinka in Fatigue and Fracture Mechanics: 30th Volume, ASTM STP 1360

Page 243:
"Fatigue crack propagation is usually analyzed using fracture mechanics with the assumption that cracks already exist in the components" and that the core case interface is the presumed location.

Moving to:

Increasing the fatigue limit of a high-strength bearing steel by a deep cryogenic treatment by E. Kerscher, K.-H. Lang
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 240 (2010) 012059 Issue 1, 2010

Abstract:

High-strength steels typically fail from inclusions. Therefore, to increase the fatigue limit of high-strength steels it is necessary to modify the inclusions and/or the surrounding matrix. The goal must be a higher threshold for crack initiation and/or crack propagation. One possibility to reach this goal seems to be a deep cryogenic treatment which is reported to completely transform the retained austenite as well as to facilitate the formation of fine carbides. Therefore, specimens were annealed before or after deep cryogenic treatment, which was carried out with different cooling and heating rates as well as different soaking times at −196° C. Hardness and retained austenite measurements and fatigue experiments were used to evaluate the different sequences of treatments mentioned above. The fatigue limit increases only after some of the sequences. The results show that the soaking times are not relevant for the fatigue limit but it is very important to temper the specimens before the deep cryogenic treatment. Also, repeated deep cryogenic treatments had a positive influence on the fatigue limit.

And:

http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tome ... 1TOMEJ.pdf

The Open Mechanical Engineering Journal, 2008, 2, 1-11 1
1874-155X/08 2008 Bentham Science Publishers Ltd.

Deep Cryogenic Treatment: A Bibliographic Review

P. Baldissera and C. Delprete

EFFECTS ON THE MATERIAL MICROSTRUCTURE
Ferrous Alloys
According to the literature about cryo-treated tool steels,
the improvement of mechanical properties can be ascribed to
different phenomena:
• Complete transformation of the retained austenite into
martensite;
• Fine dispersed carbides precipitation;
• Removal of residual stresses.

It is known that almost all steels at 193 K transform the
austenite into martensite. The use of cold treatment has been
initially developed on martensitic tool steels in order to remove
retained austenite with benefits on hardness.

Moving to:

http://www.metal-wear.com/history.html

We've traced cryogenic processing as far back as the 1930's where the Junkers company in Germany used it on components of their Jumo aircraft engines. We got this from a fellow who worked with an ex-Junkers engineer by the name of Adolph Luerker. Mr. Luerker emigrated to the US after the war and ended up in California working for McCulloch Chain Saw company. He suggested that they use the process on chain saw blade links. They did and started cryo treating their chainsaw blades but kept it a secret so other manufacturers could not make better blades. This was around the mid 1950's.

Moving to:

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkers_Jumo

My emphasis:

Junkers Jumo war die Marken-Bezeichnung der von Junkers Motorenbau und Junkers Flugzeugwerk bzw. ab 1936 von den Junkers Flugzeug- und Motorenwerken (JFM) selbst hergestellten Otto- und Diesel-Flugmotoren, Strahltriebwerke und Zweitakt-Dieselmotoren für Nutzfahrzeuge.

Die Abkürzung Jumo setzt sich aus den Worten Junkers Motor zusammen.

Moving to:

My emphasis:

Lurenbaum in:

Jahrbuch 1937 der deutschen Luftfahrtforschung. Unter Mitwirkung des Reichsluftfahrtministeriums und der Luftfahrtforschungsanstalten und -Institute sowie de Lilienthal-Gesellschaft.

Moving to:

Cryogenics, The Racer’s Edge

Diekman, Frederick J. and Roger Schiradelly
Heat Treating Progress
November 2001, pp. 43-49

Available at:
http://www.cryogenictreatmentdatabase.o ... cers_edge/

~~~~~~~~~~

Remarks: Cryogenic treatment of aircraft engine components would have been top secret information in both Germany and during WWII and after the war for the Allies. It is possible that the components that Lurenbaum tested were cryogenically treated and this is why they exceeded the strength estimates predicted in 37.14, Figure 37-2 of Shigley and Mischke for solid versus hollow bars.

Jon, you need to seriously improve your research skills and ability to correlate information from disparate sources and that includes making connections between historical and current research.

[Kevin Johnson]

I must commend Mr. Schmidt as he has a lot of patients. One would have better results talking to a wall then Kevin Johnson. In an earlier post Mr. Johnson used the words "dedicated student" and at the root of the problem is he thinks like a student. Only willing to suck in information from others, but not willing to think for himself, gain experience in the art, and become a master in the art. Instead all he does is argue over others work and words as to who is right. Is a waste of time IMO.

Mr. Salesky, when I analyzed and solved the windage control issues in the Porsche 928 I discovered the Kibort Effect. I named it after a racer who was mocked by many but presented hard data. Interpreting that data led to the discovery. I listen to data.

In theoretical logic I put forward the foundational ambiguity of negation as a prime logical operator. I assure you that is controversial.

But thank you for your thoughts.

[barnym17]

I have no idea what you just said kevin ,but I think you said you fixed it!

[Dave Koehler]

In theoretical logic I put forward the foundational ambiguity of negation as a prime logical operator.

Kevin,
Sentences like this is where you attract trouble.
When I have to google various portions of that sentence in an effort to grasp what you are saying and fail I have to wonder.....
Is there a college course called "Say What? 101"

[johnny5]

I think he said that negative areas of pressure (maybe behind a counterweight )are causeing oil migration. Not sure and i think it is good that people look to history(avoids repeat mistakes) and books for info . I not educated on the software but if people just start using that and that alone and dont know whats really going on then in 20 year years are they going to be a bunck of idiots putting inputs in to a computer letting he computer tell them everything with out them knowing nothing. This was not directed at you schmit the (idot putting inputs in a computer and not knowing anything )

[Erland Cox]

We already are there today, we are surrounded by idiots.
Jon has a connection to real stuff but most software users don't.
What will happen to someone relying on his GPS for all of his life when it fails?
The new generation would die if someone shut of their electricity.
It's scary that people take so much for granted without actually knowing anything.

Erland