|
Main
- books.jibble.org
My Books
- IRC Hacks
Misc. Articles
- Meaning of Jibble
- M4 Su Doku
- Computer Scrapbooking
- Setting up Java
- Bootable Java
- Cookies in Java
- Dynamic Graphs
- Social Shakespeare
External Links
- Paul Mutton
- Jibble Photo Gallery
- Jibble Forums
- Google Landmarks
- Jibble Shop
- Free Books
- Intershot Ltd
|
books.jibble.org
Previous Page
| Next Page
Page 14
But it _does_ rotate, nevertheless; and this unquestioned fact is of
itself enough to show that there is something wrong with the formula
as applied to trains like those in question. What that something is,
we think, has been made clear by what precedes; since it is impossible
in any sense to add together motions which are unlike, it will be seen
that in order to obtain an intelligible result in cases like these,
the equation must be of the form _n'_/(_m'_ - _a_) = _n_/_m_. We shall
then have:
n 20 n' 20
For the wheel F, --- = ---- = ----, [therefore] n' = - ---- a;
m 19 -a 19
n n'
For the wheel H, --- = 1 = ----, [therefore] n' = -a;
m -a
n 20 n' 20
For the wheel K, --- = ---- = ----, [therefore] n' = - ---- a,
m 21 -a 21
which corresponds with the actual state of things; all three wheels
rotate in the same direction, the central one at the same rate as the
train arm, one a little more rapidly and the third a little more
slowly.
It is, then, absolutely necessary to make this modification in the
general formula, in order to apply it in determining the rotations of
any wheel of an epicyclic train whose axis is not parallel to that of
the sun-wheels. And in this modified form it applies equally well to
the original arrangement of Ferguson's paradox, if we abandon the
artificial distinction between "absolute" and "relative" rotations of
the planet-wheels, and regard a spur-wheel, like any other, as
rotating on its axis when it turns in its bearings; the action of the
device shown in Fig. 18 being thus explained by saying that the wheel
H turns once backward during each forward revolution of the train-arm,
while F turns a little more and K a little less than once, in the same
direction. In this way the classification and analysis of these
combinations are made more simple and consistent, and the
incongruities above pointed out are avoided; since, without regard to
the kind of gearing employed or the relative positions of the axes, we
have the two equations:
n' - a n
I. -------- = ---, for all complete trains;
m' - a m
n' n
II. -------- = ---, for all incomplete trains.
m' - a m
[Illustration: PLANETARY WHEEL TRAINS. Fig. 19]
As another example of the difference in the application of these
formul�, let us take Watt's sun and planet wheels, Fig. 19. This
device, as is well known, was employed by the illustrious inventor as
a substitute for the crank, which some one had succeeded in patenting.
It consists merely of two wheels A and F connected by the link T; A
being keyed on the shaft of the engine and F being rigidly secured to
the connecting-rod. Suppose the rod to be of infinite length, so as to
remain always parallel to itself, and the two wheels to be of equal
size.
Then, according to Prof. Willis' analysis, we shall have--
n' - a n -s
-------- = --- = -1, n' = 0, [therefore] -------- = -1, whence
m' - a m m' - a
-a = a - m', or m = 2a.
The other view of the question is, that F turns once backward in its
bearings during each forward revolution of T; whence in Eq. 2 we
have--
n' n
-------- = --- = -1, n' = -a,
m' - a m
-a
[therefore] -------- -1, which gives -a = a - m', or m' = 2a,
m' - a
Previous Page
| Next Page
|
|