Routine testing caused a failure in the same spot on the Black Widow backyard roller coaster. It is here by canceled. But hold out hope! We are going to reimagine it.
Check this Out
Routine testing caused a failure in the same spot on the Black Widow backyard roller coaster. It is here by canceled. But hold out hope! We are going to reimagine it.
The 1990’s movie Speed is a classic! And it has some wonky engineering stuff in it too. Let’s separate fact from fiction and give some good engineering tips too.
If you have any experience using pneumatic cylinders, you know that they don’t hold a midstroke position at all. You design them to be fully extended or retracted. So, what if you need the cylinder to stop at a position in the middle? This is a very difficult proposition. Well, here is a trick to maintain two midstroke positions with high accuracy despite the load.
In order to hold a midstroke position using only pneumatics, place two cylinders of varying strokes barrel to barrel. When the stroke of both cylinders is added together, it should equal the total stroke required. To achieve the midstroke position, extend one cylinder while retracting the other.
A number of years ago, I ran into a situation where I had a pneumatic clamp. The clamp was high cycle and the client was concerned about air usage since they were nearing the system capacity. So, we wanted to keep the air usage a low as possible.
I noticed that the at each end of the long workpiece we needed a lot of clearance (about 12″) to unload the old and insert the new. However, when we were in the middle, we only needed about 2″ of stroke to make contact with the workpiece, making a total stoke of 12″. (We went with 14″ just to be safe). If each cycle was the full 12″ we would be wasting a lot of air when we only needed 2″ of stroke.
After scratching my head for a few days, I thought about using two cylinders, placed back to back. They would have strokes of 10″ and 4″. When were were changing out the workpiece, both would be retracted. Once we were ready to run, we would extend a 10″ cylinder. When we would clamp, we would extend the 4″ cylinder. Only the 4″ cylinder would cycle until the end of the workpiece when both would retract to give adequate clearance.
In this case, I only needed 3 positions, 0″, 10″ and 14″. But using this design, I would also have a 4″ position.
This design saved air usage and lowered operating cost, which lead to a very pleased customer. The system did require another valve to control the second cylinder, a little more login in the PLC and some additional support. These additional upfront costs were quickly surpassed by the savings from reduced air usage.
One note about this design, is that the cylinder barrels will move, which can make hose routing difficult. Be sure to leave room for flexibility or use a hose carrier. If your cylinders have different strokes, mount the shorter stroke cylinder to the base of your apparatus. This will minimize the distance the hoses move.
Another note is that it works well in a situation where the cylinder has a pinned clevis at each end. If you are intending for the cylinder to be mounted at the base as a fixed joint, it won’t be able to support the weight of the cylinders and is likely to buckle or bend. As a result, you will need to support the cylinder barrel with some sort of sliding mechanism.
There are several ways to attach the cylinders together. The main way is to add in two identical plates (flange plates) between the cylinders. The plates will have countersunk screws that mount to the base of each cylinder. They will then have another bolt pattern that will allow you to bolt the plates together. Many cylinder manufacturers have these as a standard part.
If you want more of a challenge, you can attach them by replacing the tie rods with longer ones. This is a riskier operation and should only be done by a qualified person. Take the tie rods out of each cylinder and then insert the longer rods. Torque the rods evenly using multiple passes. This process can be very tricky if one or more of the end blocks is tapped and needs to be drilled out.
If you have ever designed a system that used two cylinders like this, let us know in the comments. What were the benefits? What were the challenges?
If you have ever used a pneumatic or air cylinder, you know that they only have 2 positions: fully retracted or fully extended. There is no middle ground. In fact, due to the compressibility of air, the position will change under varying loads. Most designs take this into account, but what if you REALLY needed to hold a position in the middle. Is there a solution?
A pneumatic cylinder can hold a center position if it is used in conjunction with a hydraulic cylinder. Because hydraulic fluid is incompressible, the hydraulic cylinder can positively lock the rod in place while the pneumatic cylinder produces the motion.
If your application can support a long cylinder configuration, use a series configuration. This will consist of a pneumatic cylinder with the rod co-axially connected to a double rod hydraulic cylinder. The other rod will be connected to the work piece.
As the pneumatic cylinder strokes, the hydraulic cylinder will also stroke. This will move fluid from one side of the cylinder to the other. When the desired position is reached, a valve can activate to cut off this flow and lock the cylinder in place.
A double rod cylinder is the recommended type because there is an equal area of fluid on each side making it a constant volume of hydraulic oil in the cylinder at all times. This means that as the cylinder is stroked, oil moves from one side of the cylinder to the other. A locking valve can be added between the ports, but no other hydraulic equipment is needed like a reservoir or pump. Simplicity is key for this design!
Since one rod is feeding into the other. This makes for a very long assembly and as a result, buckling may become an issue. But don’t fear, the two bases of the cylinders do not move relative to each other so you can design a structure to support them that can handle the buckling load. And as a bonus, you can mount the cylinder either from the end or as a trunion, which will reduce the length and therefore the tendency to buckle.
So if you are tight on space, having the hydraulic and pneumatic cylinders side by side may be the way to go. This decreases the length, but increases the design complexity in several ways; more hydraulic components and difficulty providing motion.
Most likely the switch from series to parallel will change the hydraulic cylinder from double rod to single rod. This means that the area on each side of the cylinder is different and we will need a place to store this extra oil when the cylinder is retracted. Now you need a reservoir.
When moving, both lines will need to join together to feed into the reservoir. To prevent trapped air, the reservoir should be mounted higher than the cylinder. To lock the lines, you can block the line to the reservoir, but I wouldn’t do that. Because of entrapped air and temperature differences, you could get movement. A better way is to use pilot operated check valves or a counterbalance valve on each port.
You can also use solenoid operated load holding as well. Please note that we have now increased from one holding valve to two and added a reservoir.
Since the cylinders are side by side, you can do one of three things:
There are pros and cons with each of these configurations.
If the pneumatic cylinder is in line with the load, it will be difficult to hold accurate positioning because the supporting structures may flex. The forces will flow through the hydraulic cylinder in a C shaped configuration. If the hydraulic cylinder is mounted as fixed on each end, the cylinder rod will have to support not only the load, but also the moment caused by the offset.
If the cylinder is free on each end, the structure will need to carry this moment on each end. It is recommended only to use this case when the load is about the same as what the pneumatic cylinder can produce and the other cylinder just hold position.
It is most likely a better design to have the hydraulic cylinder in line with the load. When holding, the moment is removed and a higher load can be sustained with little stress on the structures. This configuration is definitely preferred if the device is moved unloaded into position, locked and then loaded.
Note that your offset moment load still exists, but on the pneumatic cylinder. I would highly recommend that you design your structures to handle this and put pivoting joints on each end of the cylinder.
You may find that it is beneficial to split the difference. That perfectly all right, just make sure that you are handling the moment load and no unintended motion will occur.
Adding a hydraulic control locking cylinder changes the dynamics of the system. First of all, it will slow the system down, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Most of the time, we will meter out the air anyway, so we can just remove that from the pneumatics. If need be, we could add a needle valve or flow control in the hydraulic circuit.
(I’m curious to see if in a parallel configuration you could meter in and out of the reservoir after the work ports have combined. If there is no air in the system, it might work, but I’ve never tried it. If it doesn’t work, you can meter out of each cylinder port. Let me know your thoughts below in the comments.)
Second, you can use electronic positioning sensors like an LVDT to help control the system. Combining a position sensor with a process controller and a proportional hydraulic valve, you can slow the cylinder down at it comes to the end of the stroke or the position you want. The sky is the limit.
With a little innovation, you can do what was once thought impossible: you can hold a pneumatic cylinder midstroke and it won’t move, even under changing load.
If you try to do this, please comment below. I’d really like to see the applications and know what challenges you had.
No roller coaster is complete without a POV video. The Black Widow is no exception.
So not everything always goes to plan. This video is evidence of that.