Help needed to solve a static analysis for the design of the Shaft for a Grinding Machine

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the static analysis of a shaft in a grinding machine, where the user faces challenges due to having more unknowns than equations. They have formulated four equations related to moments and forces but are unsure about the validity of assuming the normal force is equal to the operator's force plus the wheel's weight. Suggestions include ensuring proper bearing support to counteract forces, using a free body diagram (FBD) for stress analysis, and clarifying the role of the normal force as a parameter rather than an unknown. Additionally, it's advised to consider pre-tension in the pulley system and to include the horizontal force component from the workpiece in the equations. The conversation emphasizes the importance of accurately modeling the forces and moments acting on the shaft for a successful design.
fabianv19
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone, this is my first post on the forum. I am analyzing the following system: a shaft that contains a transmission pulley, a support, and a grinding wheel used for polishing tanks. I want to design the shaft and calculate the required torque to select the motor.

1740797331553.png



I have encountered some problems with the static analysis of the shaft because, according to my calculations, I have more unknowns than equations. In the attached image, I show the four equations I have formulated:
  1. Sum of moments in the X direction.
  2. Sum of forces in the Y and Z axes.
  3. An additional equation that relates the tensions in the pulleys.
1740797393092.png


This gives me a total of four equations, but I have five unknowns:
  • N (the normal force or the reaction from the workpiece).
  • T1 and T2 (the tensions in the pulley).
  • The reactions at the support. (BY and BZ)
It seems that I cannot obtain more static equations without introducing additional unknowns. To solve this, I assumed that the normal force N is equal to the force F1, which is the force applied by the operator during polishing, plus the weight of the wheel. However, I am not sure if this assumption is valid.
Could anyone help me determine if this is correct or if there is another way to solve the system? Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance!
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF.

I believe the problem arises because the spindle position is not fixed, as it has only one spindle support bearing.

You need a bearing at each end of a practical grinder spindle.
One bearing will predominantly counter the drive belt tension, while the other will predominantly counter the contact force of the wheel against the work.
 
The operator is responsible the normal force I believe so it is a parameter, not an unknown?
 
Also, do a FBD of the shaft if you intend to analyze stress and deflection of the shaft. Just show the shaft and effective loadings on it.
 
These are just my suggestions as an amateur scientist.
The analysis is of the forces applied to the shaft only.
Eqn (3) you do not need a term for the reaction of the table to the bearing as we are considering only the shaft.
Eqn (4), friction. You do not need to consider friction provided there is no slip. I suggest you check for slip as a separate exercise and increase pre-tension if required.
I think you need a term for pre-tension, as T1-T2 = pre-tension.
Eqn (2) I think you need to include the horizontal component of force applied by the workpiece, presumably N x mu.
I think you need to numerically specify the force N applied by the workpiece.
I also notice that you do not analyse the bending moments on the shaft, Post #2 is applicable here.
 
Here's a video by “driving 4 answers” who seems to me to be well versed on the details of Internal Combustion engines. The video does cover something that's a bit shrouded in 'conspiracy theory', and he touches on that, but of course for phys.org, I'm only interested in the actual science involved. He analyzes the claim of achieving 100 mpg with a 427 cubic inch V8 1970 Ford Galaxy in 1977. Only the fuel supply system was modified. I was surprised that he feels the claim could have been...
Thread 'Turbocharging carbureted petrol 2 stroke engines'
Hi everyone, online I ve seen some images about 2 stroke carbureted turbo (motorcycle derivation engine). Now.. In the past in this forum some members spoke about turbocharging 2 stroke but not in sufficient detail. The intake and the exhaust are open at the same time and there are no valves like a 4 stroke. But if you search online you can find carbureted 2stroke turbo sled or the Am6 turbo. The question is: Is really possible turbocharge a 2 stroke carburated(NOT EFI)petrol engine and...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
4K
Back
Top