by Chappy » Thu Sep 09, 2004 11:34 pm
Daffy,
No, they won't. They are much larger and "stiffer" than the small Lord mounts Ultraflight used. I was able to use them on my design because they basically only had to isolate the rocking motion of the engine/redrive assembly from the nacelle mounts. They have held up to the tension loads, because even though they are not rated for tension, they only have to deal with a much smaller amount - in relation to the mounts other ratings. Most of the little Pioneer's vibration is absorbed right into the engine mounted front and rear aluminum mounting plates. I originally made them out of 1/8" 6061-T6, but they developed cracks in only about 15-20 hours running time. I remade them with 3/16" 2024 T3 (might have been T4), which just seemed ridiculously thick, but have held up fine. Four Barry Controls mounts are used in each assembly.
Maybe I can include a picture below to help illustrate the above description.
Chappy
PS. My original starter assembly mounting was made from all aluminum, but couldn't stand the vibration either. The nylon standoffs replaced aluminum plates and angle. The bolts attach to rubber "well mounts", and never loosen up even though they are not safetied. The well mounts (like a rubber grommet with a nut imbedded in it) also help absorb vibration.
The solid prop shafts are loctited and pinned into the aluminum eccentrics that rotate to allow belt tension adjustment. A bolt threaded into the end of the solid shaft keeps the pully bearings from pulling off. One belt would easily handle the power of this engine, but by using two, I could run the belts with much less tension. This allows a little belt slipping which helps to absorb some engine vibration. It's not as efficient as it could be, and they slip in the rain, but it has worked out fine - not a bad tradeoff.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.