177 Tension Spring
#1
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Thread Starter
177 Tension Spring
Pulled my engines for a freshening, this thing has not been treated nicely!
Anyway one of the repairs I had to do on the Weiand 177 Supercharger was to weld up the hole for the tension spring, no problem done
My question is, there is a thicker cast area just beside where the bolt was originally installed, does anyone think there would be a problem with moving the bolt towards the thicker part. It would apply more tension to the spring by about 30 degrees
Thanks Jason
Anyway one of the repairs I had to do on the Weiand 177 Supercharger was to weld up the hole for the tension spring, no problem done
My question is, there is a thicker cast area just beside where the bolt was originally installed, does anyone think there would be a problem with moving the bolt towards the thicker part. It would apply more tension to the spring by about 30 degrees
Thanks Jason
#2
Registered
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You could always use a torque wrench to measure how much additional torque will be on the idler arm at +30* preload. That will also allow you to see if it can actually be preloaded by 30* more without binding on the snout. Any more tension in the idler will add heat to the snout and case, so that is something to consider beyond if the bearing can handle it.
#4
Registered
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Then you can figure out how much load is on the bearing and see what kind of room you have to work with at 14000rpm. Here is the bearing number.
SKF 6304 for the snout bearing
BT
SKF 6304 for the snout bearing
BT
#6
Registered
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
weight x moment arm (length of idler) = torque. You'll have to solve for weight. Whatever rpm you spin your engine to x 2 will be the max rpm of the bearing iirc. Good luck.
#7
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Thread Starter
Ok so my results are
using my current belt, with the retaining bolt in the proposed location the increased fatigue load on the bearing would be increased by 59% to a load of .212kN the bearing is rated for .333kN
The spring does not approach a bind situation but I don't like the idea of increasing the load that much so, I'll keep it in the original location
Thank you BT for your help
using my current belt, with the retaining bolt in the proposed location the increased fatigue load on the bearing would be increased by 59% to a load of .212kN the bearing is rated for .333kN
The spring does not approach a bind situation but I don't like the idea of increasing the load that much so, I'll keep it in the original location
Thank you BT for your help