Pulley FEA
02-24-2003, 04:17 PM
#51
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: SF South Bay
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2002 C230 Coupe
Buellwinkle:
The weight of the all-alloy ASP pulley before the steel hub was around 6 lbs right? Just want to make sure the density is right because rotation depends on mass. Thanks!
C230 Sport Coup:
It was a theoretical comparison simulation before, but now it's going more toward reality.
The weight of the all-alloy ASP pulley before the steel hub was around 6 lbs right? Just want to make sure the density is right because rotation depends on mass. Thanks!
C230 Sport Coup:
It was a theoretical comparison simulation before, but now it's going more toward reality.
02-24-2003, 09:32 PM
#52
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: SF South Bay
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2002 C230 Coupe
An T6061 alloy pulley with 0.07" thick steel sleeve seems fine under static loads at steady 4000 rpm. I may do a frequency sweep for vibration if I have time tomorrow - just for my own curiosity though. But modal analysis is always a nightmare.
02-25-2003, 07:39 PM
#54
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: SF South Bay
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2002 C230 Coupe
Today I tried to put gap elements to simulate actual shaft contact (i.e., only support compressive contact onto the shaft surface) but they confused the contact surfaces on the steel sleeves so it didn't work... I've decided to let this slip through.
There is no point on keep doing the steel sleeve version when the one I'll be putting on is the steel hub version. So when I have time I'll do the hub version instead.
Peace,
FHK
There is no point on keep doing the steel sleeve version when the one I'll be putting on is the steel hub version. So when I have time I'll do the hub version instead.
Peace,
FHK
02-25-2003, 07:41 PM
#55
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: SF South Bay
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2002 C230 Coupe
Originally posted by Buellwinkle
The ASP alloy pulley weighs 5 lbs 1 oz. The steel hub adds 8 oz.
The ASP alloy pulley weighs 5 lbs 1 oz. The steel hub adds 8 oz.
02-25-2003, 09:40 PM
#56
Former Vendor of MBWorld
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 930
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Buellwinkle
It's a high number like 180-200 lbs.
It's a high number like 180-200 lbs.
No one will offend/insult or otherwise incur a legal wrath from me posting FEA results for our pulley. Ive seen them before from the manufacturer of the pulley- so post away!
If you really want to do this right (which you cant possibly be doing if you dont have the DIM's for the pulley) shouldnt you confer about the actual pulley specs rather than guessing?
Also, wouldnt it be mildly useful to have the power required to turn all the individual accessories and their relative position to the crank pulley? (at least in so far as the two belt departures from the crank)
Last edited by Brandon @ Kleemann; 02-25-2003 at 09:58 PM.
02-25-2003, 10:01 PM
#58
Former Vendor of MBWorld
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 930
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes- I suppose it could be fun to pretend- but not when you are the one an the receiving end of all the pretend conclusions about the results of this FEA. If you are going to do anything, do it right or dont bother.
02-26-2003, 12:46 AM
#59
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: SF South Bay
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2002 C230 Coupe
That's why I chose not to post any new results since I don't have the exact dimensions on the Kleemann and the ASP steel sleve alloy pulley. And since they were good there was no need to email them to Buellwinkle either, sorry.
The simulation was as real as it could be. I doubt a pulley manufacturer will go into this much detail as what I did, but I could be wrong.
The tensioner force was not even needed: the two belts are in exact opposite directions. So when spinning the most force will be on the outer SC belt, and at this moment there will be no force on the inner belt grooves (free surface). If the belt is not elongating, which I highly doubt it will, this means basically the outer SC belt grooves are radially fixed.
I admit the results I posted before were way too conservative because I didn't measure the actual washer diameter and assumed the diameter of the hub flange. But when I had a chance to measure it was only 1.85", which is about the size as the hub OD. So there were a lot of bending stress on the old analyses, which resulted in high stresses at the pulley-hub outer surface.
The new results showed no contact to the crank shaft except at the very end, so my last effort of trying to put contact elements to simulate the shaft was just for fun.
I can post the new results when I get to work tomorrow. Maybe Kleemann can compare to his results and see if they agree.
Keep in mind that they were ALL static analyses excluding vibration.
FHK
The simulation was as real as it could be. I doubt a pulley manufacturer will go into this much detail as what I did, but I could be wrong.
The tensioner force was not even needed: the two belts are in exact opposite directions. So when spinning the most force will be on the outer SC belt, and at this moment there will be no force on the inner belt grooves (free surface). If the belt is not elongating, which I highly doubt it will, this means basically the outer SC belt grooves are radially fixed.
I admit the results I posted before were way too conservative because I didn't measure the actual washer diameter and assumed the diameter of the hub flange. But when I had a chance to measure it was only 1.85", which is about the size as the hub OD. So there were a lot of bending stress on the old analyses, which resulted in high stresses at the pulley-hub outer surface.
The new results showed no contact to the crank shaft except at the very end, so my last effort of trying to put contact elements to simulate the shaft was just for fun.
I can post the new results when I get to work tomorrow. Maybe Kleemann can compare to his results and see if they agree.
Keep in mind that they were ALL static analyses excluding vibration.
FHK
02-26-2003, 07:58 PM
#65
MBWorld Fanatic!
I have no clue what they mean but they look great. Maybe I'll have Lee make me a blue pulley with a red center. I'll have to lose the air filter box so that I can see it though.
Last edited by Buellwinkle; 02-27-2003 at 12:04 AM.
02-26-2003, 11:31 PM
#66
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: SF South Bay
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2002 C230 Coupe
LOL! You just need a cone type K&N filter and route it toward the bottom 
BTW, just put on the ASP pulley (the 5th one!!), so far so good. Hope it will hold up!
BTW, just put on the ASP pulley (the 5th one!!), so far so good. Hope it will hold up!
