Subject:
|
Re: Pneumatic Questions
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.technic
|
Date:
|
Mon, 21 Nov 2005 17:12:31 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
4567 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.technic, Chio Siong Soh wrote:
> In lugnet.technic, Kevin L. Clague wrote:
> > It is so interesting that you broached the topic of vaacume/pressure
> > pressure at the same time as the hydraulic question. In many ways they are
> > the same problem. Containment.
>
> No - exhaust!
I don't understand this statement.
> >
> > With vaccume/pressure you need a switch with containable exhaust, otherwise
> > the uncontrolled exhaust leads to a leaking system that cannot work.
>
> You need to eventually discharge the compressed air (or vacuum) in a pneumatic
> system. Interestingly enough, this is the first time I heard of a pneumatic
> system using compressed air and vacuum at the same time. Usually it's just one
> or the other.
In this compressor/engine schematic I drew yesterday, vaccume is the exhaust for
pressure, and pressure is the exhaust for vaccume inside the engine. The part
of the compressor that creates vaccume pulls the pressure exhaust out of the
system.
I don't know that there will be an advantage to using both, but heck its worth a
try to see if it can be done.
> >
> > With hydraulics, you need a contained system, else you end up with
> > hydraulic fluid dripping from the machine.
>
> Yep, but there is also an exhaust to lead out the liquid from the cylinder which
> is then pumped back to the system.
Yes, and in the pressure/vaccume, the vaccume plays the role of exhaust.
>
> On Amazon.com site, there's this book "Hydraulics and Pneumatics: A Technicians
> and Engineers Guide by Andrew Parr" where you can look inside the pages. On page
> 5 and 6 there are very clear diagrams of a hydraulic and a pneumatic system
> which shows what I mean.
I've had a clear understanding of that level of hydraulic and pneumatic systems
for a long time, but thanks for the pointer.
> >
> > I've never really gotten into the hydraulic concept, but I think I'm going
> > to have to try, but first I'm going to finishing solving/proving your
> > pressure vaacume engine question.
>
> Yep. Don't forget he wants to know:
> "Would the extra power from the cyl be enough to drive the extra
> resistance of the added switches, and end up with more power than a traditional
> engine, or would I be better off just sticking to the traditional engine and
> just feeding it more air faster?"
I seriosly doubt it will perform better.
Well, my quest is different. My quest is to determine if pressure/vaccume can
be done at all. I remember someone saying that it could'nt even be done at all
in LEGO ;^)
> >
> > I often get inspired when people say it can't be done, so I thank Dr. Soh
> > for that bit of inspiration also.
>
> Haha, that's me ;-)
>
> CS
I like to live outside the box. It allows for more possibilities of invention.
I really got into the pneumatic boolean logic game, when someone told me "you
can't do boolean logic with LEGO, because of the way the switches work". My
intuition said that the statement was wrong. He was biased by his knowledge of
what was industry standard.
When Andrew asked if pressure/vaccume would perform better, he was told it
couldn't even be done, because of the way the switches work.
In many ways I'm glad I know so little about industry standard, then the
industries perceived limits aren't a hinderence to invention.
I don't really care which performs better, pressure or pressure/vaccume. I'm
interested if it can be done.
Kev
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Pneumatic Questions
|
| (...) No - exhaust! (...) You need to eventually discharge the compressed air (or vacuum) in a pneumatic system. Interestingly enough, this is the first time I heard of a pneumatic system using compressed air and vacuum at the same time. Usually (...) (19 years ago, 21-Nov-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
28 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
