How Thick Should Carbon Fiber Springs Be to Withstand a 200-Pound Impact?

AI Thread Summary
To design carbon fiber springs that can withstand a 200-pound impact while deflecting only 2-2.5 inches, it's essential to consider both dynamic and static response factors. Calculating the required thickness involves analyzing the kinetic energy of the falling weight and the spring's static position. Additionally, damping is crucial; without it, the spring could rebound the weight after impact. The discussion highlights the complexity of spring design under dynamic loads. Proper calculations and damping mechanisms are necessary for effective performance.
TORE BACK
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello this is me first post on here i don't know if this would be the right section but I'm trying to design and build this spring to only deflect 2-2.5 inches the force on it will be 200 pounds falling from 6 feet and coming down on the the two circles. my problem is i need to learn how to calculate what thickness it should be because i have to build a few that will range from 120 to 220 pounds falling from the same height

Any help would be appreciated



Thank you

Tim Russo
 

Attachments

  • Spring.jpg
    Spring.jpg
    12.3 KB · Views: 567
Engineering news on Phys.org
anyone
 
This is a difficult problem to answer, you'll have to take both the dynamic and static response factors of the beam into account. The analysis will involve looking at the kinetic energy of the falling body, as well as the static position of the body on the spring.

What you haven't mentioned though is how you plan to damp this system, since if the body falls onto the spring and the spring absorbs all of the energy, then in turn it will bounce the body back up. It's a classic undamped spring/mass problem from physics.
 
Hi all, I have a question. So from the derivation of the Isentropic process relationship PV^gamma = constant, there is a step dW = PdV, which can only be said for quasi-equilibrium (or reversible) processes. As such I believe PV^gamma = constant (and the family of equations) should not be applicable to just adiabatic processes? Ie, it should be applicable only for adiabatic + reversible = isentropic processes? However, I've seen couple of online notes/books, and...
I have an engine that uses a dry sump oiling system. The oil collection pan has three AN fittings to use for scavenging. Two of the fittings are approximately on the same level, the third is about 1/2 to 3/4 inch higher than the other two. The system ran for years with no problem using a three stage pump (one pressure and two scavenge stages). The two scavenge stages were connected at times to any two of the three AN fittings on the tank. Recently I tried an upgrade to a four stage pump...
Back
Top