<p><SPAN name="9"></SPAN></p>
<h2>A NEW FORM OF FLEXIBLE BAND DYNAMOMETER.</h2>
<p>[Footnote: Read before Section G of British Association.]</p>
<h3>By Professor W.C. UNWIN.</h3>
<p class="ctr"><ANTIMG src="./illustrations/8b.png" alt="Fig. 1."></p>
<p class="ctr">Fig. 1.</p>
<p>In the ordinary strap dynamometer a flexible band, sometimes
carrying segments of wood blocks, is hung over a pulley rotated by
the motor, the power of which is to be measured. If the pulley
turns with left-handed rotation, the friction would carry the strap
toward the left, unless the weight, Q, were greater than P. If the
belt does not slip in either direction when the pulley rotates
under it, then Q-P exactly measures the friction on the surface of
the pulley; and V being the surface velocity of the pulley (Q-P)V,
is exactly the work consumed by the dynamometer. But the work
consumed in friction can be expressed in another way. Putting
θ for the arc embraced by the belt, and μ for the
coefficient of friction,</p>
<p>
Q/P = ε^{μ^{θ}},<br/></p>
<p>or for a given arc of contact Q = κP, where κ
depends only on the coefficient of friction, increasing as μ
increases, and <i>vice versa</i>. Hence, for the belt to remain at
rest with two fixed weights, Q and P, it is necessary that the
coefficient of friction should be exactly constant. But this
constancy cannot be obtained. The coefficient of friction varies
with the condition of lubrication of the surface of the pulley,
which alters during the running and with every change in the
velocity and temperature of the rubbing surfaces. Consequently, in
a dynamometer in this simple form more or less violent oscillations
of the weights are set up, which cannot be directly controlled
without impairing the accuracy of the dynamometer. Professors
Ayrton and Perry have recently used a modification of this
dynamometer, in which the part of the cord nearest to P is larger
and rougher than the part nearest to Q. The effect of this is that
when the coefficients of friction increase, Q rises a little, and
diminishes the amount of the rougher cord in contact, and <i>vice
versa</i>. Thus reducing the friction, notwithstanding the increase
of the coefficient. This is very ingenious, and the only objection
to it, if it is an objection, is that only a purely empirical
adjustment of the friction can be obtained, and that the range of
the adjustment cannot be very great. If in place of one of the
weights we use a spring balance, as in Figs. 2 and 3, we get a
dynamometer which automatically adjusts itself to changes in the
coefficient of friction.</p>
<p class="ctr"><ANTIMG src="./illustrations/8c.png" alt="FIG.2 FIG.3"></p>
<p class="ctr">FIG.2 FIG.3</p>
<p>For any increase in the coefficient, the spring in Fig. 2
lengthens, Q increases, and the frictional resistance on the
surface of the pulley increases, both in consequence of the
increase of Q, which increases the pressure on the pulley, and of
the increase of the coefficient of friction. Similarly for any
increase of the coefficient of friction, the spring in Fig. 3
shortens, P diminishes, and the friction on the surface of the
pulley diminishes so far as the diminution of P diminishes the
normal pressure, but on the whole increases in consequence of the
increase of the coefficient of friction. The value of the friction
on the surface of the pulley, however, is more constant for a given
variation of the frictional coefficient in Fig. 3 than in Fig. 2,
and the variation of the difference of tensions to be measured is
less. Fig. 3, therefore, is the better form.</p>
<p>A numerical calculation here may be useful. Supposing the break
set to a given difference of tension, Q-P, and that in consequence
of any cause the coefficient of friction increases 20 per cent.,
the difference of tensions for an ordinary value of the coefficient
of friction would increase from 1.5 P to 2 P in Fig. 2, and from
1.5 P to 1.67 P in Fig. 3. That is, the vibration of the spring,
and the possible error of measurement of the difference of tension
would be much greater in Fig. 2 than in Fig. 3. It has recently
occurred to the author that a further change in the dynamometer
would make the friction on the pulley still more independent of
changes in the coefficient of friction, and consequently the
measurement of the work absorbed still more accurate. Suppose the
cord taken twice over a pulley fixed on the shaft driven by the
motor and round a fixed pulley, C.</p>
<p>For clearness, the pulleys, A B, are shown of different sizes,
but they are more conveniently of the same size. Further, let the
spring balance be at the free end of the cord toward which the
pulley runs. Then it will be found that a variation of 20 per cent.
in the friction produces a somewhat greater variation of P than in
Fig. 3. But P is now so much smaller than before that Q-P is much
less affected by any error in the estimate of P. An alteration of
20 per cent. in the friction will only alter the quantity Q-P from
5.25 P to 5.55 P, or an alteration of less than 6 per cent.</p>
<p class="ctr"><ANTIMG src="./illustrations/8d.png" alt="FIG. 4"></p>
<p class="ctr">FIG. 4</p>
<p>To put it in another way, the errors in the use of dynamometer
are due to the vibration of the spring which measures P, and are
caused by variations of the coefficient of friction of the
dynamometer. By making P very much smaller than in the usual form
of the dynamometer, any errors in determining it have much less
influence on the measurement of the work absorbed. We may go
further. The cord may be taken over four pulleys; in that case a
variation of 20 per cent. in the frictional coefficient only alters
the total friction on the pulleys 1¼ percent. P is now so
insignificant compared with Q that an error in determining it is of
comparatively little consequence.</p>
<p class="ctr"><ANTIMG src="./illustrations/8e.png" alt="FIG. 5"></p>
<p class="ctr">FIG. 5</p>
<p>The dynamometer is now more powerful in absorbing work than in
the form Fig. 3. As to the practical construction of the brake, the
author thinks that simple wires for the flexible bands, lying in V
grooves in the pulleys, of no great acuteness, would give the
greatest resistance with the least variation of the coefficient of
friction; the heat developed being in that case neutralized by a
jet of water on the pulley. It would be quite possible with a
pulley of say 3 feet diameter, and running at 50 feet of surface
velocity per second, to have a sufficiently flexible wire, capable
of carrying 100 lb. as the greater load, Q. Now with these
proportions a brake of the form in Fig. 3 would, with a probable
value of the coefficient of friction, absorb 6 horse power. With a
brake in the form Fig. 4, 8.2 horse power would be absorbed; and
with a brake in the form Fig. 5, 8.8 horse power would be absorbed.
But since it would be easy to have two, three, or more wires side
by side, each carrying its load of 100 lb., large amounts of
horsepower could be conveniently absorbed and measured.</p>
<hr>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />