| Author |
Message |
    
Aaron
| | Posted on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 03:26 pm: | 
|
Spidey: Could I get you to call (920) 893-5595 and talk to Mike? They're the experts on the Revolution cyls. I don't know the numbers off the top of my head and I'm a long way from the office.
On the Axtell stuff, call (515) 243-2518, I suspect Chaz can help you out. I don't think they offer an XL aluminum cylinder, at least not for the stock bolt pattern. They're good people and they make terrific products, we're a dealer for them as well. |
Spiderman
| | Posted on Saturday, February 22, 2003 - 03:59 pm: |
|
Cool thanks!! |
Notsip
| | Posted on Sunday, February 23, 2003 - 12:25 am: |
|
Spidey: When talking to Axtell, ask them about the "Cool-Shot" Oil Squirters. They will reduce the operating cylinder temperature drastically. |
Blake
| | Posted on Sunday, February 23, 2003 - 03:28 am: |
|
Ben,
"I'd start off with the assumption that no real engineering team would develop an engine that loaded the studs to yield during operation"
Exactly. That's why I want the spec. If I can get the material specification I can ascertain the maximum, do not yield loading for each stud.
The relative cross sectional areas between stud/screw and cylinder make a HUGE difference in this type of analysis.
No need to mess with thermal gradients in this simple exercise. We don't need no stinkin funny elements either.  |
Benm2
| | Posted on Sunday, February 23, 2003 - 07:00 am: |
|
Blake:
Look at the aftermarket suppliers for studs; they are usually more forthcoming with spec info. (also, they sometimes mention stock specs for comparison)
Ben |
Hoser
| | Posted on Sunday, February 23, 2003 - 12:44 pm: |
|
Blake :
Don't forget what the studs are threaded in to !! , coming from a guy who has observed and repaired more than one crankcase with cylinder studs torn out !.
J.D.H. |
Notsip
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 04:12 pm: |
|
Blake,
How are you doing on your analysis on the cylinders. Just checking, I haven't heard anything and just wondered if you were finished.
Notsip |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 06:19 pm: |
|
Notsip,
I cannot do a thing without the required geometry. Material specifications would be nice too, but not absolutely necessary. Did you not see my posts above?  If you want me to perform the analysis, you'll need to provide the pertinent information I've requested. Until that happens, the job is on hold. It's on you brother. |
Notsip
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 09:45 pm: |
|
Blake,
Sounds like you might be a little toggled up on this analysis. I was becoming to believe that you were the guru in all aspects of the H-D engine.
For the information that you are looking for you should check with Nallin/Millenium on the specs they use to develop their products. It appears that you and Aaron are pretty tight with these guys and they should be willing to help you out. If I recall correctly, in an earlier post Aaron said that he had LOTS of HARD DATA which I assume that he still does.
Remember, you and Aaron are the ones that contradicts what I said in an earlier post, so I beleive it is up to you to support what you say about the aluminuim cylinder being better than a cast (Axtell). I have all the Real World Data to support the cast cylinder. It's up to you to convince me differently. So far you haven't.
The balls back in your court. Have fun!!! |
Blake
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - 01:58 am: |
|
Hotsip,
WTF are you talking about??? Did you not ask...
Quote:I could use your expertise on figuring out the actual clamping pressure on the cylinder under cold conditions and then under hot conditions...
You asked, I thought sincerely, for the analysis. I don't have time to dig around for obscure parts geometries. If you want me to do the analysis, you'll need to provide the required information. You are certainly free to disagree. Though I'm not sure with what point of mine you are disagreeing. What I offered above was all pretty basic stuff. I'm unable to convince you differently of anything if I don't know with what it is you disagree.
I'm perfectly happy to do some simple analysis if you can provide the required geometry.
Grab a stock cylinder, smear some grease on its faying surfaces and press it onto a clean sheet of paper. Set a scale on the paper next to the grease print and take a pic of it from directly above. I can scale and calculate the needed geometry from that. I mean we at least know the ID right? Then... Measure the studs and screws and their threads and the height of the cylinder from face to face; measure the grip length taken up by the heads. It ain't no big deal, I just don't have that information easily available to me.
What did I contradict that you are disputing anyway? I thought through the technical discussion I offered that I had supported my contentions. And it certainly is not my duty to convince you of my statements. I've tried educating others of similar ilk on this site. In the end after hurling insults and disparaging innuendo at me they ignore the evidence and of course never offer any apology or recantation of their erroneous technical diatribe.
It is disingenuous of you to ask for my help to figure the "clamping pressure on the cylinder" and then when asked to provide the required geometry flippantly swap demeanors and tell me to "have fun" and that it's up to me to convince you differently. You are a real piece of work. |
Joey
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - 11:35 am: |
|
Blake! While some may respond to your requests claiming you didn't prove your point, others (me) have learned quite a bit when you start throwing formulae out there.
You used multisylabic words that were above "normal" people, (someone claimed that, but I don't remember who) and made me glad I'm not. I'm sure I'll be coming back to BadWeB to figure out something--I'll just search for all posts by Blake, and I'll find what I need eventually.
A question on sleeves: How about steel? Decades ago, someone once told me he had his 4-banger rebuilt with steel sleeves. Is this an advantage? |
Blake
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - 02:14 pm: |
|
Joey,
Thanks for the overly kind words. Steel is basically iron with a little carbon thrown in to add hardness and strength. I don't know the trade offs between steel and iron sleeves. Possibly better strength versus longer wearing-in? "Steel" is a very general term used to describe a large class of iron alloys. Without knowing the exact alloy it would be tough to ascertain possible benefits.
Big Hairy Ralph would be the guy who might know the answer. He is very knowledgeable on the comparative advantages of various alloys. |
Joey
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - 04:20 pm: |
|
Not being kind--just letting you know that the more stuff you post, the more chances I have of getting some good math. Took Physics in HS, and just can't remember the formulas. I used to know how to figure out how fast a 6-ounce snow ball has to travel to melt completely on impact with a brick wall at a temperature of 15 degrees. That isn't here somewhere is it?
 |
Newfie_Buell
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - 09:40 pm: |
|
Blake,
Your posts are always educational and very informative. What is really going on in the mind of yours?????? I hope your putting it to good use other than keeping BADWEB online.
Joey,
Come up this way and we can actually do the snowball thing. |
Notsip
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - 10:31 pm: |
|
My My Blake, do we have our underwear up in a bunch? The real thing is that I made a suggestion to Forevernow and Aaron said that he had "Hard Data" to dispute my comments. And then you came in with all of this analysis about expansion of aluminum. All I am asking for is for you or Aaron to back up what you have said. If both of you are so adament about aluminum cylinders being better than cast iron cylinders please show me your facts and findings. I was asking for your help in finding out the clamping pressure of the cylinder with 35# of torque applied. Being the engineer that you are this should not be a real problem for you. Anyways I already know what the clamping pressure is or should be. I just wanted to see if you came up with the same numbers that I have. If you and Aaron really want to convince me and all the others that are watching, that aluminum cylinders are the best, you are going to have to do some homework on your own. I feel that if I don't keep prodding you this discussion will go unanswered. You and Aaron have challenged the cast iron cylinders and we just want to see your theory and facts to support your comments. Let's keep the ball rolling. We all will learn something from this. Isn't the knowledge gained from this worth the effort?
By the way Blake, some engineers do think I am a piece of work, same as you do, but all I am is a "REALIST" with the desire to learn. Some engineers theories are only that. I am the person that puts your theory in to reality circumstances. That is why my job title is Research & Development. Sorry, but some one has to test all of the components that engineers design. |
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, February 27, 2003 - 01:56 am: |
|
"My My Blake, do we have our underwear up in a bunch?"
I'd say more that I have my fist in a clench.
"The real thing is that I made a suggestion to Forevernow and Aaron said that he had "Hard Data" to dispute my comments. And then you came in with all of this analysis about expansion of aluminum."
I presented no analysis.
"All I am asking for is for you or Aaron to back up what you have said."
What do you want me to "back up"?
"If both of you are so adament about aluminum cylinders being better than cast iron cylinders please show me your facts and findings."
Already did. If they are so superior, why don't you show me all the motorcycle engines using solid iron cylinders and aluminum pistons.
I was asking for your help in finding out the clamping pressure of the cylinder with 35# of torque applied. Being the engineer that you are this should not be a real problem for you.
Being the engineer that I am I understand that ascertaining bolt tension from torque is a VERY dicey proposition. There is not a single structural code anywhere that allows installation of high strength bolts based upon uncalibrated torque.
"Anyways I already know what the clamping pressure is or should be. I just wanted to see if you came up with the same numbers that I have."
Then you should have stated exactly that instead of posing as if you wanted assistance with a problem. Either way, I would need the size of the threads to be able to calculate an estimate.
"If you and Aaron really want to convince me and all the others that are watching, that aluminum cylinders are the best, you are going to have to do some homework on your own."
No, we don't.
"I feel that if I don't keep prodding you this discussion will go unanswered."
It will go unanswered until you provide the geometry required to do the analysis.
"You and Aaron have challenged the cast iron cylinders and we just want to see your theory and facts to support your comments."
Neither I nor Aaron challenged cast iron cylinders. They have proved their merit on the drag strip. Rather, you were the one who proffered that cast iron cylinders were better than iron sleeved cylinders which were better than nicasil lined aluminum cylinders. We simply refuted that statement. Mainly because it was bullshit.
Fact: Iron weighs near three times as much as aluminum. Good on a sportbike? No.
Fact: Iron conducts heat about half as efficiently as aluminum. Good on an air cooled street or road racing engine with aluminum pistons? No.
Fact: No modern production moto engines use iron cylinders. Many use all aluminum cylinders. Some use iron lined cylinders.
"Let's keep the ball rolling. We all will learn something from this. Isn't the knowledge gained from this worth the effort?"
Provide the required geometry.
"By the way Blake, some engineers do think I am a piece of work, same as you do, but all I am is a "REALIST" with the desire to learn."
You might want to rethink your approach to learning. Offering erroneous information then demanding proof of those who refute it won't gain you much respect or cooperation.
"Some engineers theories are only that."
WTF does that mean? I'm sick of hearing people indict the integrity of engineers with that kind of glib remark. To me it exhibits an inferiority complex. Engineers are like any other class of workers, some are good, some are clueless, some are brilliant. Most are pretty darn sharp.
"I am the person that puts your theory in to reality circumstances. That is why my job title is Research & Development."
Never heard of a job titled "Research and Development", rather that is usually a department or group.
"Sorry, but some one has to test all of the components that engineers design."
If that testing is not designed, specified, supervised, conducted, and evaluated by qualified engineers, it probably isn't going to be worth crap.
You obviously resent engineers. Maybe you have a good reason, I don't know. My offer still stands... provide the pertinent geometry, I'll do the analysis to estimate cold and hot clamping load. The cold load is easily estimated; all I need is the size of the threads; that is it. I do not know the size of the studs or their threads. You or someone needs to provide that before I can provide the preload estimate. It's that simple. Like I said, the job is on hold until you supply the required information.
No more rhetoric, please. |
Jim_Witt
| | Posted on Thursday, February 27, 2003 - 02:15 am: |
|
 |
Dave
| | Posted on Thursday, February 27, 2003 - 07:08 am: |
|
Good information even if it is surfacing from a bit of verbal/written friction.
...gotta love the word 'glib'. That's the second time I've ever seen it used on BadWeb and just in the last two weeks. Almost as good as huckleberry.
DAve |
Steveshakeshaft
| | Posted on Thursday, February 27, 2003 - 07:46 am: |
|
Might I propose (and I am not an expert!) that to gain that very last ounce of power from the Thunderstorm power plant, you'd need to weld up the standard squish and machine it more accurately? And further that the geometry of the piston crown on a TS piston is a little sub-optimal if the maximum "squish" effect into the combustion chamber is to be acheived?
Regards
Steve
steve_s@ukbeg.com
http://www.ukbeg.com |
Sarodude
| | Posted on Thursday, February 27, 2003 - 09:50 am: |
|
Right on, JW!
-Saro |
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, February 27, 2003 - 12:34 pm: |
|
I prefer the Roadrunner show.
Steve,
I've heard that same exact suggestion from very reputable sources. |
Rick_A
| | Posted on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 12:04 am: |
|
Then you should have stated exactly that instead of posing as if you wanted assistance with a problem.
If I had a dollar for every time you didn't do that, Blake  |
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 12:11 am: |
|
Rick,
Bullshit! When did I EVER ask disingenuously for your or anyone's assistance? |
Rick_A
| | Posted on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 01:28 am: |
|
That's not what I'm trying to say...quite contrary, actually. You sometimes avert to questions about subjects you very well know the answers to...that's my point. What your point in doing so is...I can only assume...
I just find that to be frustrating and an annoyance...that's all |
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 03:36 am: |
|
Rick,
I'd ask that you reread the quote you posted and your statement thereafter. You basically called me a hypocrite. Apparently you misunderstood my statement?
Why do I ask questions who's answers I know? When I give the quick answer and am met in return with "I don't believe you", I'm not left with much choice. I figure if one is able to discern the truth for him/herself one won't need to believe me. I can see how that might be annoying. Try looking at it from my perspective.
My point in doing so is to try to nudge an interested person into thinking about and truly learning something. You are a smart man. You could easily be smarter than me. Sometimes, the hardest thing for a smart man to admit is that he doesn't know everything, and that some of what he does know is probably incorrect.
Here's a scary thought... I used to be very much like you. I always wanted the quick answer. I can't tell you how many times I threw my thermo textbook out the door into the dorm hallway wall after trying futilely for twenty minutes to work an assigned problem. Talk about frustrating. Then I learned that actually reading the chapter before trying to work the problems really was beneficial. Imagine that. |
Redstripe
| | Posted on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 05:48 am: |
|
Thank God You grew up then, Blake!  Catfight!!! |
Rick_A
| | Posted on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 09:43 am: |
|
Well...I basically don't have easy access to the same resources...and don't have the time to research and learn it at this point. Laymans terms is all I know.
On the "I don't believe you" episode I think we learned a lot, though, didn't we? 
I appreciate you saying I'm smart...but I don't believe you! |
Firemanjim
| | Posted on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 11:51 am: |
|
And to think I come here to read about motorcycle stuff--what was I thinking??? |
Benm2
| | Posted on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 12:46 pm: |
|
I can count on (less than) one hand the number of other people I spend my days with who have even the slightest interest in the topics typically discussed here. There aren't many people I know who even know what "cold squish" is, much less people who want to discuss it (heatedly, even!). I can discuss the latest draft picks or sports contracts till the coffee's gone, though! Personally, I like it. Cat fights & all. |
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 12:53 pm: |
|
Rick,
Good one. LOL. As to having resources for learning, sure you do; you have the internet, and you don't need to be an physicist or engineer to understand basic concepts.
FMJ,
I remember when I first heard the term "squish"; it wasn't that long ago. |
Notsip
| | Posted on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 02:14 pm: |
|
What does "SQUISH" have to do with "QUENCH"? Or does "QUENCH" have anything to do with "SQUISH"? What's your input on this? |
Rick_A
| | Posted on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 05:48 pm: |
|
Yeah Blake...but on the net you can find supposed "facts" to support most any viewpoint...not necessarily the correct one. I'd like to find good sources on some of these topics. As far as motorcycles go, I've found a ton of great sources for tuning info, pictures and parts...that's about it. |
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 06:27 pm: |
|
Yep, ya gotta be able to sort the bull from the straight poop.
Notsip,
Stud thread size? Squish=quench if deck has corresponding flat area opposite that of piston. One thing at a time? |
Notsip
| | Posted on Saturday, March 01, 2003 - 12:45 am: |
|
Blake,
I'm glad to see that you are still working on the clamping pressure analysis, this is a good exercise for you. As for me,I already know what the clamping pressure is and don't have time to wait on a answer so I will be moving on to the next step in the proper squish settings. Without you figuring out the clamping pressure it may be difficult for you to respond on the next analysis.
By the way Squish and Quench are not the same in Internal Combustion Engine Technology.
Catch Ya Later,
Notsip |
Blake
| | Posted on Saturday, March 01, 2003 - 01:56 pm: |
|
Notsip,
I'm not working on the clamp load. I would need the geometry and thread size to do so. It is not an execise that benefits me in any way. It is a simple calculation to arrive at an estimate. What was it you said... "I love constructive critisism, it is healty for all, but will not condone destructive critisism. If it comes to that I refuse to participate." What kind of criticism are you offering above? |
|
