FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47  
48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   >>   >|  
s, which gives _n_/_m_ = -1; but when A is fixed and T revolves, we have _m'_ = 0, whence in the general formula n' - a ------ = -1, or n' = 2 a; -a which means, being interpreted, that F makes two rotations about its axis during one revolution of T, and in the same direction. Again, let A and F be equal in the 3-wheel train, Fig. 16, the former being fixed as before. In this case we have: n --- = 1, m' = 0, which gives m n' - a ------- = 1, [therefore] n' = 0; -a that is to say, the wheel F, which now evidently has a motion of circular translation, does not rotate at all about its axis during the revolution of the train-arm. [Illustration: PLANETARY WHEEL TRAINS. Fig. 16] All this is perfectly consistent, clearly, with the hypothesis that the motion of circular translation is a simple one, and the motion of revolution about a fixed axis is a compound one. Whether the hypothesis was made to substantiate the formula, or the formula constructed to suit the hypothesis, is not a matter of consequence. In either case, no difficulty will arise so long as the equation is applied only to cases in which, as in those here mentioned, that motion of revolution _can_ be resolved into those components. When the definition of an epicyclic train is restricted as it is by Prof. Rankine, the consideration of the hypothesis in question is entirely eliminated, and whether it be accepted or rejected, the whole matter is reduced to merely adding the motion of the train-arm to the rotation of each sun-wheel. But in attempting to apply this formula in analyzing the action of an incomplete train, we are required to add this motion of the train-arm, not only to that of a sun-wheel, but to that of a planet-wheel. This is evidently possible in the examples shown in Figs. 15 and 16, because the motions to be added are in all respects similar: the trains are composed of spur-wheels, and the motions, whether of revolution, translation, or rotation, _take place in parallel planes perpendicular to parallel axes_. This condition, which we have emphasized, be it observed, must hold true with regard to the motions of the first and last wheels and the train-arm, in order to make this addition possible. It is not essential that spur-wheels should be used exclusively or even at all; for instance, in Fig. 16, A and F may be made bevel or screw-wheels, without affecting the action or the analysis; but th
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47  
48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

motion

 
revolution
 

formula

 
hypothesis
 

wheels

 

motions

 
translation
 

evidently

 

circular

 

rotation


matter

 
parallel
 

action

 

examples

 

adding

 

reduced

 

accepted

 
rejected
 

required

 

incomplete


analyzing

 

attempting

 

respects

 

planet

 

regard

 
exclusively
 
essential
 

addition

 
instance
 

affecting


analysis
 

planes

 

perpendicular

 

trains

 
composed
 

condition

 

emphasized

 

observed

 
similar
 

difficulty


rotate

 
Illustration
 

perfectly

 

consistent

 

TRAINS

 
PLANETARY
 

general

 
revolves
 

interpreted

 

direction