don't worry about the delay, and thank you for your time!
Doing 1 case is not sufficient is what I think, because the PS system is going to be in tension and compression alternately, thus I was wondering if we could solve this problem in 4 steps with CG of the WP (along with PS system) changing its location by 90┬░ rotation in every step.
Yes, the PS system will alternately be in tension and compression but in module the quantities of the stresses will be the same, or Is there something I'm missing?
In any case, if I want to do a 4-step analysis, do you think it is necessary to conduct four different analyses, or is it possible to do everything within a single structural analysis by changing the settings within the various steps? If the latter case is what you suggested, how do I rotate the model from one step to another? Or is it enough to set four different concentrated forces and moments rotated 90 ┬░ to each other and then individually activated during the various steps of the analysis?
So for intermittent rotation we can consider your problem statement under static loading and no need to consider centrifugal force effect (I am assuming the angular velocity is very low thus high torque)
Yes, through a dynamic calculation I estimated a torque of about 1500 Nm and an angular speed of about 6 rpm (very low indeed).
Okay then, I'll omit the centrifugal force if you think it might be negligible in this case.
The highlighted are is where the WP shaft fits right ? That's where that shaft will apply moment (Force) on PS system.
I see! Thanks for the clarification
Also what I would have done is considered WP shaft, then PS system, turret and linear actuators simultaneously with WP shaft, Linear actuators as Rigid bodies while everything else as flexible body with BC's as Fixed support at Actuator base, Pin fixed to Top of Turret (I saw that there are bearings housings which are mounted on top of the turret) and so on if you are interested because then you would directly get stresses developed in Turrets and load at the actuator base.
Actually, I could try to do as you said. My only concern is that an analysis of this type would be much more complex to complete and at this moment the geometries are not yet fully defined (so I risk "wasting time" and then having to repeat it all over again).
In this phase, a rough sizing based on the PS system alone may be sufficient, I suppose. Or do you think I should follow your suggested approach anyway?
Also I think there should be ribs supporting the turret and minimize the tilt avoiding slippage of shaft from PS system.
I honestly hadn't considered this hypothesis. With bare eye I don't see such deformation as to justify the sliding of the shaft on the pin. Consequently, I thought that this phenomenon was due purely to the principle of the inclined plane.
I will try to take this into account as well then
I have another question, is the design of Pin confirmed and cannot be changed ? I was thinking about it last night and I thought a squared shape pin (and not tapered) with a considerable entry chamfer at the WP end of shaft would make a better pin design, avoiding slipping, reducing tilting of Turrets and increasing overall strength of this structure. (if the diameter of pin is more than 25mm then we can go for hexagonal shaped pin too)
No, the design of the pin is still ongoing and undergoes changes on a practically daily basis.
Could you kindly explain your idea better? Maybe with a little sketch?
In any case, the current pin has been conceived as conical because the WP is placed in the center of the positioner with a small angular misalignment with respect to the axis of rotation of the motor (misalignment due to the non-centesimal precision of the hydraulic motor that must lift the WP). Consequently, the two pins placed on the turrets not only have the task of supporting the weight of the WP and putting it in rotation, but also that of centering it with respect to the axis of rotation of the motor. A conical type coupling should certainly be self-centering. I don't know how a pin of a different shape could behave instead. My fear is that there may be jamming due to the initial misalignment between the shaft axis and the axis of the pin attached to the turret