![]() |
Vinyl Asylum Welcome Licorice Pizza (LP) lovers! Setup guides and Vinyl FAQ. |
|
I worked through a couple of examples in response to one of the questions in the original thread and I thought the results illuminating, so here goes.Example 1: Bearing 40mm across, centre balanced, weight 60g. Armtube 180mm long, constant weight for length, total weight 15g. Headshell 40mm long, centre balanced, 7 g. Counterweight 150g, assumed as point mass, positioned to attain static balance (x = 21.27mm). Stylus position at x = 225mm.
Total I cm = 637594 g.mm 2 , effective mass = 12.5 g.
Now lets's substitute a 200 g counterweight, moved further in to maintain balance (x = 15.95mm).
Total I cm = 6210628 g.mm 2 , effective mass = 12.25 g. This means that a 33% greater CW mass reduces effective mass (and I cm ) by 2%.
Now let's take the effective mass back to where it was by adding mass to the armtube. Armtube mass for equal I cm becomes 19.75g so the 33% greater CW mass allows us to increase the armtube mass by about the same amount. BTW with good engineering this would allow us to nearly double torsional rigidity.
Just to satisfy the the original question, let's swap the masses of the headshell and armtube, so the total mass is the same. The I cm increases to 907460 g.mm 2 so the effective mass increases to 17.9 g, an increase of 43 percent. A light headshell will do much more than a heavy counterweight.
If anyone wants me to run through the actual maths I'd be only too happy, I love maths. The basic formula is
I cm = ∫ x1 x2 x 2 dM
All the masses and dimensions used are measured from bits of tonearms I had around.
Mark Kelly
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Topic - Effective Mass and Moment of Inertia (again) - Mark Kelly 03:57:40 11/18/05 (43)
- So what about damping, Mark? - paul_s 09:39:16 11/19/05 (5)
- See previous thread - Mark Kelly 16:47:15 11/19/05 (4)
- Something just occurred to me.... - John Elison 18:26:01 11/19/05 (3)
- I don't think so. - Mark Kelly 22:00:20 11/19/05 (2)
- Re: I don't think so. - John Elison 04:50:53 11/20/05 (1)
- Shure - KlausR. 08:00:26 11/20/05 (0)
- Re: Effective Mass and Moment of Inertia (again) - John Elison 11:42:48 11/18/05 (3)
- OK , here goes. - Mark Kelly 14:35:57 11/18/05 (2)
- Now I understand.... - John Elison 18:13:34 11/18/05 (0)
- On that day of Engineering school . . . - jlep 17:50:13 11/18/05 (0)
- Makes sense to me. - garth 08:28:26 11/18/05 (31)
- Re: Makes sense to me. - KlausR. 22:21:15 11/18/05 (0)
- If record grroves really went round - paul_s 16:00:23 11/18/05 (1)
- My feelings mirror yours. - tubesforever 17:55:51 11/18/05 (0)
- No that's quite wrong. - Mark Kelly 14:15:31 11/18/05 (2)
- I completely agree with Mark....but did you mistake his statement? - tubesforever 18:02:02 11/18/05 (1)
- Of course it does, the question is how much - garth 18:26:40 11/18/05 (0)
- I know! It's unfortunate... - John Elison 12:50:52 11/18/05 (3)
- It's unfortunate you only believe what you write... - garth 13:03:32 11/18/05 (2)
- In other words, I should believe what you write? (nt) - John Elison 13:59:49 11/18/05 (1)
- Your words, not mine! (nt) - garth 19:51:05 11/18/05 (0)
- Re: Makes sense to me. - mosin 11:44:32 11/18/05 (20)
- No. - Mark Kelly 14:38:34 11/18/05 (4)
- Re: No. - mosin 07:34:09 11/19/05 (0)
- So what you are saying is ... - garth 15:44:09 11/18/05 (2)
- Mark is correct, the equation is the equation - tubesforever 18:09:18 11/18/05 (1)
- No again - Mark Kelly 16:21:21 11/18/05 (1)
- And is the basis of the brilliant Dynavectro arms (DV505/507)! nt - andyr 12:00:53 11/18/05 (14)
- Yes, it attempts (does) split the .... - garth 18:07:23 11/18/05 (13)
- Re: Yes, it attempts (does) split the .... - andyr 20:04:40 11/18/05 (11)
- I think the split design is very interesting - Mark Kelly 20:44:35 11/18/05 (10)
- Ah so, desu ka! :-)) ... - andyr 21:07:10 11/18/05 (9)
- Some more figures. - Mark Kelly 02:21:42 11/19/05 (8)
- Re: Some more figures. - andyr 14:26:24 11/19/05 (3)
- Maybe - Mark Kelly 17:38:47 11/19/05 (2)
- Thanks for the definition, Mark ... - andyr 00:46:36 11/20/05 (1)
- For the wood to absorb the vibration.. - Mark Kelly 02:47:32 11/20/05 (0)
- Cutting head advance speed - KlausR. 06:25:24 11/19/05 (3)
- 10-4 - paul_s 09:58:04 11/19/05 (2)
- Re: 10-4 - KlausR. 22:04:08 11/19/05 (1)
- An excellent choice you made... - John Elison 17:38:41 11/20/05 (0)
- I think I understand what you are trying to say... - tubesforever 18:25:31 11/18/05 (1)
- Re: Effective Mass and Moment of Inertia (again) - KlausR. 05:34:22 11/18/05 (0)