Tonight's Dumb Idea...

[george kennie]

Great info Earl!  BTW, the Partner looks awesome! Great job!!!
G.

EHaury at aol.com wrote:

>  When the suggestion that soft mounting provided more advantages than
> not was proposed, most of us subscribed to the theory that power loss
> from anything less than solid was unacceptable. I set up a test using
> a fuselage that could be equipped with either a hard (cast aluminum)
> mount or soft (same mount with radial Lord mounts and a Lord mounted
> nose ring). A miniature accelerometer was mounted to the inside of the
> firewall by the lower mount bolt and another to the mount at the same
> location. (Stud for solid, Lord studs for soft.) The accelerometers
> were connected to a dual channel spectrum analyzer to display
> amplitude g's as millivolts on a vertical scale vs. frequency on the
> horizontal. Engine was a piped OS 61 with the MK prop of the
> time. After gathering full throttle data several times, and reversing
> the accelerometers to ensure similar output, the results dramatically
> told the story. The solid mount produced a 600mv amplitude signal and
> the soft a 6mv signal. A 100 / 1 difference. BTW, no measurable
> difference in engine rpm. Switched to soft mounts and never looked
> back! Earl

=====================================
# To be removed from this list, send a message to 
# discussion-request at nsrca.org
# and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
#