The stator was one of the few purchased parts (gobrushless.com), made from thin laminations of mild steel. The heavy rotor itself is brass, the flux ring (new word I learned - not to be confused with the legendary flux capacitor), is the thin part pressed into it, and is made from very mild steel. There are 2 in the picture, one is pressed in the brass rotor, the other sitting by itself. Only the pressed in one is used, the other is just there to provide a visual for when I get time to explain it all and post more pics and hopefully a video clip.
This is really cool and quite the work of engineering art, I hope it works. If you showed up with it I would have absolutely no problems with it as an anti-listing list control device. Clark - I've seen it repeated elsewhere as well that the Texas, while performing fire support in ww2, flooded a torpedo blister to gain additional elevation on her guns. Can't find a source though.
Thanks to everyone for your kind words, encouragement, support and interest. I do have to say that this little boat has given me a run for my money. It has certainly been fun, and for that matter, incredibly educational! I will try to do an explanation on some of the design work and features etc. as I get time. I need to try to redesign a couple of parts first so the design is ready when I get an opportunity to cut the parts. I haven't forgot you asked what it weighed Tugboat, I just need to have it out of the boat again to get an accurate weight on it, but as I remember, it was just shy of 4 ounces when I had it on the scale, and I will probably machine off about an ounce to get it down to where I want it. The rotor is heavier than it needs to be. It generates WAAAAAY more gyroscopic force than I really need, even at only 20,000 RPM. I had my son hold it and "rotate" it, and all he could say while doing it was "this thing is absolutely ridiculous!" On the funnier side, one negative effect is that if there is enough force applied for long enough, when the pivot reaches it's limit, the gyroscope becomes an awesome boat capsizing device. Because I had to cheat physics a bit to make it fit where it had to fit, it's a bit more compact than is ideal, so I had to limit the available precession travel. If it were ever to get to that point, the gyro would flip the boat upside down so fast you almost couldn't see it happen. On the positive side, it would probably take a collision with a full scale boat of some type to make that happen.
This really neat work you are doing. As the the legality issues, unless there is some way to induce a list with the gyroscope I dont see how it is a list controlling device. What it is is a roll dampening system. We allow skegs and ballast weight so I dont see how this is much different. If implemented poorly it could cause some violent rolls which might be amusing to watch, but you seem to be aware of how gyroscopes behave and already made a risk assessment.
@Hovey - While I am a fan of Cannon's work... technically speaking, actively preventing list is still a list control system, which is why I said above that someone would chit him for a rules violation. @James - I knew you'd have sources You ever think about going to school to be a historian?
Anachronus probably said it best, yes depending on ones particular views it could be considered to violate the rules (as they are currently written), although it's not in the same league as the devices that caused the rule to be written in the first place. Its almost a grey area in a way. My device can't create a list, or even correct a true list, it simply keeps the boat from rolling. If the ship really wanted to list, it would, and then the gyro would flip it over the rest of the way. Of course both sides could argue their cause indefinitely, at the end of it all, the final result would be that technically it is not legal without a rule modification, and if such a modification were not in place, would require a waiver from the TO to get in the battle with the device attached, if the TO saw it worthy of a waiver AND no one else was opposed to allowing it (big if!). Currently I don't have to worry about it unless I visit another club, since I will probably have to battle with friends and family since there isn't really a club close by me.
That's too bad about not having a local club. IF you were local to us we would gladly let you battle. Tug-hopefully we can agree that this is a grey area. "actively preventing list is still a list control system" so by this argument adding ballast would be illegal as ballast when placed low actively reduces a ships tendency to list? Ballast adds inertia to the boat which reduces the ships tendency to want to move (in this case list), a gyroscope also adds inertia but with less mass. Definitely in a grey area, but I don't see a functional difference as it cant be used to control list any more than adding weight to the bottom of the hull would allow. That rule was written to prevent stupid stuff like rolling a ship to the side to present only deck to an enemy or to allow stupid amounts of down angle on a gun. Those should be illegal.
Where is the specific section in the rules about list control devices? I dont see one in the MWCi rules and the IRCWCC site seems to be unavailable.
I looked at the pdf of the official MWCI rules (which vary a little from the HTML page of rules), and saw nothing, although I was certain that there was a rule prohibiting list control systems. If there is not one, the stabilizing gyro would be legal. A device that made the ship roll from side to side (basically cheating as we discussed above) would be illegal because it would change the location of the waterline when it rolled the ship to one side. Of course, if he's arming torpedos on his Orfey, MWCI and IRC rules are immaterial in any case
I wonder if that section wasn't removed in the past few years. I remember it being in an older version though. But if it has been deleted then gyros are go!
I honestly thought there was one as well. I found a copy of the IRCWCC rules from last year and cant find an inclusion there either.
But arming torpedoes, it doesn't matter for Fast Gun Unless someone talks him into making a gyro for them. My Othar build was tight enough that I didn't have room for a gyro, although I admit that I used bigger motors than were strictly necessary. Now that the rule proposal allowing a 1/4-unit gun and 1/4-unit pump is law (for MWC), it's going to be time to pull Othar back out and get him in the fight!
By switching to brushless, the problem went away... But now I have smaller, lighter motors and gears to fit them, and 2mm driveshafts and collars to make props for the smaller lighter driveshafts. With the pinch of the one-day-per-week furlough upon us, I am banned from new battleship projects. I do not think that my wife appreciates the subtleties of naval terminology (a cruiser would be to her another 'battleship') but Othar is okay, being pre-existing and distinctly non-battleship-ish even to the uninitiated. But I don't want to take over the Uritski thread More will follow on Othar in his own thread.
Sounds like Othar is going on a diet! Feel free to borrow Uritskis thread anytime you like! Any recent progress on Othar? I'm happy to report that I have finished the major fabrication on everything but the superstructure, just a long punch list of things to do now. I am currently derailed by a kitchen remodel that has turned into a dining room, breakfast area, two hallways, new windows, new doors, and kitchen remodel. It will be about another month before I get back to Uritski
A sort of domestic Washington Treaty -- have your wife read the salutary first chapters of Corelli Barnett's "Engage the Enemy More Closely" regarding the dire effects of running down warship production on the Royal Navy.
I am granted the whole weekend for boat work, so I will post some pics of the new & improved Othar. Also cutting windows on the Foch-ing loaner boat, which has subdecks, drive, and rudders in.
