Landracing Forum Home
December 12, 2017, 01:26:40 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News:
BACK TO LANDRACING.COM HOMEPAGE
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  


(Note: Donations are not tax deductible)







Live Audio Streaming and Archives of Past Events
Next Live Event: TBD
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Stronger Bottom shaft for Winters Extremeliner.  (Read 24174 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
robfrey
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Age: 52
Location: Butler, PA
Posts: 1121



WWW

Ignore
« on: March 14, 2016, 11:19:46 PM »

I have designed a new bottom shaft that will be made from 300m. It should be about 51% stronger than the 300m offered by Winters.
If you want one, let me know and I will increase the order qty. They will be about $1000 a piece. If we get more orders, they will be cheaper. I'm having (3) made for myself. The stock shafts are only 1.062" diameter in the narrowed "flex" section. Our shafts will be 1.220" diameter in the narrow section. I believe the 1.062 diameter was chosen to clear the ring gear on the 4.86 champ rears.
Logged

496 BGS
carbinitelsr.com
carbiniteracing.com
carbinite.com
desotoman
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Location: So Cal.
Posts: 2406


Modified Roadster




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: March 15, 2016, 03:31:03 PM »

Rob,

I am just curious, did you happen to break the original shaft? Reason I am asking is that by increasing the size by 51 percent will the shaft still be able to have some torsion? I was told that was the reason Q-C manufacturers sized the bottom shaft the way they do.

Tom G.
Logged

Asking questions is one's only way of getting answers. As a young boy I was always taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. It suggests that the quest for knowledge includes failure, and that just because one person may know less than others they should not be afraid to ask rather than pretend they already know. In many cases multiple people may not know but are too afraid to ask the "stupid question"; the one who asks the question may in fact be doing a service to those around them.
Rex Schimmer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Age: 74
Location: Fulton, CA
Posts: 2125


Only time and money prevent completion!




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: March 16, 2016, 05:07:47 PM »

Rob,
Are you increasing the dia because of stress? If so what is your calculated stress?  I agree with Tom regarding one of the purposes of the small dia is to attenuate shock loads between the input and the change gears and the ring and pinion.

Rex
Logged

Rex

Not much matters and the rest doesn't matter at all.
robfrey
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Age: 52
Location: Butler, PA
Posts: 1121



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #3 on: March 17, 2016, 07:32:15 AM »

Yes, there will still be a necked down  and it will be the smallest section but not nearly as small as original. New shaft design should be 51% stronger not 51% bigger.
Yes. We did break the original shaft rather easily.
Logged

496 BGS
carbinitelsr.com
carbiniteracing.com
carbinite.com
robfrey
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Age: 52
Location: Butler, PA
Posts: 1121



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #4 on: March 17, 2016, 07:37:43 AM »

I also have very long axles that should also help with the transient torque spikes.
Logged

496 BGS
carbinitelsr.com
carbiniteracing.com
carbinite.com
bbarn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Age: 47
Location: Harmony, PA
Posts: 615





Ignore
« Reply #5 on: March 17, 2016, 08:13:35 AM »

Yes, there will still be a necked down  and it will be the smallest section but not nearly as small as original. New shaft design should be 51% stronger not 51% bigger.
Yes. We did break the original shaft rather easily.

Ugh...those pictures bring back memories of a long 2 days in a hot dry dusty world!
Logged

I almost never wake up cranky, I usually just let her sleep in.
Rex Schimmer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Age: 74
Location: Fulton, CA
Posts: 2125


Only time and money prevent completion!




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: March 17, 2016, 12:36:03 PM »

Just for $hits and grins do you happen to know the hardness of the failed shaft? The failure is characteristic of a ductile material torsion failure, normally if the material is heat treated to a fairly high level and therefore more brittle the failure in torsion has a 45 degree failure path. Maybe the stock shaft needs a better heat treat. 300 M can certainly be taken to hardness in the 40-50 Rc area without problems of being to brittle. The difference in tensile strength between Rc30 and Rc40 is about 25%.  BTW what did Winters have to say?

Obviously going to the larger shaft will probably eliminate the shaft failure but may just move it to a different spot. And you do have long axles which should help attenuate shock load for the drive train.

Rex
Logged

Rex

Not much matters and the rest doesn't matter at all.
desotoman
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Location: So Cal.
Posts: 2406


Modified Roadster




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: March 18, 2016, 12:56:59 PM »

Rob,

Thanks for the pictures and information. Sorry about the mistake of 51% bigger instead of stronger.

Do you know if the bottom shaft in the Extremeliner is the same as the Champ style Winters makes except for the larger diameter and more splines for the Q change gears? If not no problem as I can call Winters and ask.

Rex has some good questions.

Tom G.
Logged

Asking questions is one's only way of getting answers. As a young boy I was always taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. It suggests that the quest for knowledge includes failure, and that just because one person may know less than others they should not be afraid to ask rather than pretend they already know. In many cases multiple people may not know but are too afraid to ask the "stupid question"; the one who asks the question may in fact be doing a service to those around them.
johnneilson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Age: 56
Location: N 34 15 ' 0 '' W 118 21 ' 53
Posts: 428





Ignore
« Reply #8 on: March 18, 2016, 01:52:42 PM »

Just a comment, pictures are deceiving.
Be careful the shaft increase in size does not get larger than the root of the smaller splines.
You may have to work on that also.
Logged

As Carroll Smith wrote; All Failures are Human in Origin.
ronnieroadster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Location: Connecticut
Posts: 544





Ignore
« Reply #9 on: March 18, 2016, 02:53:50 PM »

 
  After seeing the picture of your two piece lower shaft it brought back memerys of a similar experiance I had a few decades ago in my roadster. Just for the hell of it here's the short story about my lower shaft failure.   After breaking the lower shaft in my Halibrand I changed to a stronger one next failure was the ring and pinion fixed that problem with a ring gear snubber next I found the input shaft on the four speed was now twisted next point of failure after input I think would have been the crankshaft. Good times doing this back yard hot rod stuff.  grin
« Last Edit: March 18, 2016, 02:56:45 PM by ronnieroadster » Logged

Working in the shop I use the 'F' word a lot. No not that word these words Focus and Finish go Fast and Flathead Ford!
 ECTA  XF/BGRMR Record 179.8561
 LTA    XF/BGRMR  Record 186.946
 SCTA  XF/BGRMR Record 192.448
 SCTA  XXF/BGRMR Record 216.131 plus a Red Had
"Life Memeber of the Bonneville 200 MPH Club"
Stan Back
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Location: San Berdoo
Posts: 4765





Ignore
« Reply #10 on: March 18, 2016, 05:14:49 PM »

With the injected Chevy in my street roadster, along with the Hydramatic/early V-8 torque tube Cyclone quick change, I kept over 30 lbs. of air in the rear tires at all times.  That didn't eliminate breakage, but it cut it down.  I bought a Parilla motorcycle to drive to work when I broke the roadster or when it rained.  Took the front fender off, too.  Just as bright today, unfortunately, as I was then.

Stan
Logged

Member of the San Berdoo Roadsters California's most-exclusive roadster club.
Celebrating 65th anniversary of racing on the salt.
robfrey
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Age: 52
Location: Butler, PA
Posts: 1121



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #11 on: March 19, 2016, 08:59:55 PM »


Just for $hits and grins do you happen to know the hardness of the failed shaft? The failure is characteristic of a ductile material torsion failure, normally if the material is heat treated to a fairly high level and therefore more brittle the failure in torsion has a 45 degree failure path. Maybe the stock shaft needs a better heat treat. 300 M can certainly be taken to hardness in the 40-50 Rc area without problems of being to brittle. The difference in tensile strength between Rc30 and Rc40 is about 25%.  BTW what did Winters have to say?

Obviously going to the larger shaft will probably eliminate the shaft failure but may just move it to a different spot. And you do have long axles which should help attenuate shock load for the drive train.

Rex

I think the old shaft was only about 30Rc.
Logged

496 BGS
carbinitelsr.com
carbiniteracing.com
carbinite.com
robfrey
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Age: 52
Location: Butler, PA
Posts: 1121



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #12 on: March 19, 2016, 09:02:48 PM »


Just a comment, pictures are deceiving.
Be careful the shaft increase in size does not get larger than the root of the smaller splines.
You may have to work on that also.

Yes. New "small diameter is 1.22" dia and minor dia of splines is right about 1.300.
Snap ring dia are about 1.286".
Logged

496 BGS
carbinitelsr.com
carbiniteracing.com
carbinite.com
johnneilson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Age: 56
Location: N 34 15 ' 0 '' W 118 21 ' 53
Posts: 428





Ignore
« Reply #13 on: March 19, 2016, 10:30:41 PM »


Just a comment, pictures are deceiving.
Be careful the shaft increase in size does not get larger than the root of the smaller splines.
You may have to work on that also.

Yes. New "small diameter is 1.22" dia and minor dia of splines is right about 1.300.
Snap ring dia are about 1.286".

Rob, If I were you, I would talk to Winters about this first, heres why;
I am not going to dig up formulas, only share what I see.
The main shaft reduced section is to absorb the torque in a place away from the circlip grooves.
The reason for this is that the circlip groove is very short and makes a very concentrated stress riser.
The difference in size between your new shaft and the groove is only about 0.033 per side. I may be wrong, but I would expect the shaft to break there next.
Now, if there is a way to eliminate the circlip groove, you could get the larger dia to live.

Best of Luck and keep us informed, John
Logged

As Carroll Smith wrote; All Failures are Human in Origin.
robfrey
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Age: 52
Location: Butler, PA
Posts: 1121



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #14 on: March 19, 2016, 11:00:31 PM »

John, it's obvious you know what you're talking about. I have adjusted the 1.22 diameter so that it "goes red" on FEA the same time that the snap ring grooves and the minor dia of splines do.  The shaft will still torsion twist at the 1.22 dia  a few degrees at max torque. I may actually adjust it to 1.20 dia to make sure it is the weak link.
Even then, 1.20" is substantially stronger than 1.062".
Vaughn Winters is convinced that the material change alone has solved the problem. He said that nobody has broken one yet. My math says the problem is not solved. We can put down way more torque than anybody else in low gear. Even with these changes, I will have to limit low gear boost to 11 psi to keep crankshaft torque under 1300ft/lbs of torque as it will be multiplied by 2.48.
Winters will not be paying the $5000 plus bill to get our car and team back in forth to the salt never mind the heartbreak and labor of fixing it or worse yet a spoiled back up run.
I offered to pay for a run of these shafts to be made with an increased torsion section and an increased  relieved section behind the QC splines (increased to minor diameter). They couldn't be bothered. We are in the meat of race preparation season now so they are crazy busy. I was a little upset that they would not share the spline information so I could have someone else make them. It's not a big deal as I can reverse engineer them but why make it hard for me. It's not like I'm not buying their stuff.
Logged

496 BGS
carbinitelsr.com
carbiniteracing.com
carbinite.com
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Simple Audio Video Embedder
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!


Google visited last this page November 08, 2017, 03:49:39 AM