JumpDrive - C1 12' Next Results

1. Summary of Results

The Lebow load cell is suffering from hysteresis and will have to be replaced. The results on channel two are encouraging.

2. Introduction

Various measures were taken to reduce the wobbling of the C1 when either side is pressed on. The success of the fixes can be seen in Figure 1 which shows that when either side is lifted off the roller, designated by the humps, the effect on the other side is negligible. Note that channel one (green) was picked up and put down four times then channel two was picked up (blue) and the effect on the other channel was negligible.

Figure 1: Effect of Either Gyro on the Other When Lifted Off (B_10_0_01)

In previous experiments, the axle was pressed downwards and the other side measured an effect, however, the results of lifting either gyro is more applicable then pressing down on either gyro because precession lifts the gyro.

The software was also updated, now version 1.24, to include a zoom feature. Note the scale defaults to 0-25lbs.

See Initial Results for a description of the variable types.

3. Baseline Results

These results correspond to step 3 in the description and are run with the following static variables:

Gyro diameter: 12"
Angle: Horizontal
~7lbs on Channel Two

Note: This was chosen because when channel two measures that force, a 3000RPM gyro is off it's rest and can provide an easy baseline.

Raw Data: "C1 - B_7_0_00.txt" (Contained in "Baseline Raw Data.zip")

4. Primary Results

For all the primary results, the following static variables apply:

Gyro rotation speed: 3000RPM and 2000RPM
Gyro diameter: 12"
Angle: Horizontal
Main platform rotation speed is such that when channel one is precessing, 7lbs is the target for channel two (which is not spinning) and when channel two is precessing, the target for channel one is 3.5lbs. These targets are per the 7lbs baseline.
In the screen shots below, the pale blue, green, and red are the primary results, and the yellow (channel two), purple (channel one) and white are the baseline results measured in step 3 above.

Gyro Variable, Channel One Gyro 3000RPM - G_1_0_02

Note: This channel contains the gyro which was balanced.

Raw Data Filename - "C1 - G_1_0_02.txt" (Contained in "Raw Data for Gyro Variable.zip")

Gyro Variable, Channel One Gyro 2000RPM - G_1_0_03

Note: This channel contains the gyro which was balanced.

Raw Data: "C1 - G_1_0_03.txt" (Contained in "Raw Data for Gyro Variable.zip")

Gyro Variable, Channel Two Gyro 3000RPM - G_2_0_02

Raw Data: "C1 - G_2_0_02.txt" (Contained in "Raw Data for Gyro Variable.zip")

Gyro Variable, Channel Two Gyro 2000RPM - G_2_0_03

Raw Data: "C1 - G_2_0_03.txt" (Contained in "Raw Data for Gyro Variable.zip")

5. Analysis

The results from the second gyro test (G_2_0_02 and G_2_0_03) show expected results. As channel one measures the same centrifugal force as the baseline (purple and green lines overlap), the separation between channel two's baseline and primary results are clear. The separation is between the spinning gyro (blue) and the baseline or non spinning gyro (yellow). Also encouraging is that, as the gyro starts to slow down, we can see the blue line starting to converge on the yellow line as expected. A similar result occurs with the slower 2000RPM G_2_0_03 test although the results are not as conclusive.

The channel one results are inconclusive and it is believed the lebow's slow response is the factor. In G_1_0_03, it is readily apparent that when the second channel overlaps with the baseline, the first channel is showing more centrifugal force (distance between the green and purple line) then it's baseline.

It is expected that with better and matched load cells, that results similar to channel two will show up consistently.

C1 Results | Next C1 | Final C1