Torque needed to rotate shaft in pipe?

AI Thread Summary
To determine the torque needed to rotate a 2.875" diameter shaft within a 5" diameter pipe, the static friction coefficient is 0.3, resulting in a friction force of 750 lbf and an initial torque calculation of 90 ft-lbf. However, the discussion highlights that this calculation oversimplifies the scenario, as the long shaft's behavior in the pipe is complex due to factors like running clearance and inertia. It is suggested that the shaft will not simply rotate about its axis and that a more nuanced approach is needed to account for these dynamics. The conversation also references oil well drilling technology as a relevant context for understanding such calculations. Overall, the challenge lies in accurately modeling the interaction between the shaft and pipe under these conditions.
iokast
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I have a shaft within a pipe, all horizontal. Shaft diameter is 2.875" and pipe inner diameter is 5". Shaft and pipe length is 650 ft. Shaft weight is 2500 lb.

I need to determine the torque needed to begin rotating the shaft. The coefficient of static friction between the shaft and the pipe is 0.3

T = I * a
T = F * Rs
Fr = Cf * Fn

T = torque
I = moment of inertia
a = angular acceleration
F = force
Fr = force of friction
Rs = radius of shaft = 2.875/2/12 = 1.4375/12 = 0.12 ft
Rp = radius of pipe = 5/2/12 = 2.5/12 = 0.208 ft
Cf = coefficient of friction = 0.3
Fn = force normal to shaft = 2500 lbf
L = length of shaft and pipe = 650 ft

What I have so far is:

Fr = 0.3 * 2500 = 750 lbf
T = 750 * 0.12 = 90 ft-lbf

So 90 ft-lb is what needs to be overcome according to this.

This is bothering me because it does not take into account the inertia equation or the surface area of contact between the shaft and pipe. Wouldn't a greater surface area result in a greater amount of friction acting against motion. What do I use for angular acceleration in the inertia equation?

Can someone please get me on the right track here?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
This is a very difficult calculation to do .

You can't do a simple friction torque sum on a shaft that long and with that amount of running clearance .

Would take pages to explain why but basic problem is that the shaft is very unlikely to simply sit at the lowest point in the tube and rotate true about it's own axis .
 
Appreciate the response. I knew there must be more to it.

Making a lot of assumptions do you know of a way to get a general ballpark solution? I know the maximum amount of torque I can generate on the shaft so if it's order(s) of magnitude off I will know whether it is feasible to do.
 
(1) Can you tell us any more about this project ?

(2) Have a look at oil well drilling technology - this commonly involves very long shafts running in tubes .
 
Nidum said:
This is a very difficult calculation to do .

You can't do a simple friction torque sum on a shaft that long and with that amount of running clearance .

Would take pages to explain why but basic problem is that the shaft is very unlikely to simply sit at the lowest point in the tube and rotate true about it's own axis .
I suspect the problem is not intended to be that difficult. It does not matter that it will not sit at the lowest point. I would interpret the question in terms of applying a gradually increasing torque until sliding starts. We can calculate where the shaft will be in the pipe at that time.
Nidum said:
(2) Have a look at oil well drilling technology - this commonly involves very long shafts running in tubes .
I would have thought that involved much smaller clearances, which would indeed raise complications, particularly for a horizontal shaft subject to bending under its own weight.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top