V100 Mandello Merged Threadfest

[Huzo]

If the crank does rotate opposite to what we’ve come to expect, it’ll be interesting to see if the tilt in neutral is the opposite way when you tweak the throttle.

[lucian]

here's your answer, note the tilt left on throttle pulses

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpRH5PDOLIA

[Huzo]

here's your answer, note the tilt left on throttle pulses

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpRH5PDOLIA

I’ve tried and tried and tried to get the point across here on many occasions to some luminaries that should know better.
It does not matter how many times you reverse the rotation through jackshafts, bevels, and the like. Reversing the rotation of the clutch to…”reduce the torque effect…” will not work. If you reverse it once, you have to reverse it again somewhere down the drivetrain, (or you’ll end up with your back wheel going backwards..!
In it’s most fundamental sense, the engine crankcase internals are acting to spin the crank, so the equal and opposite force (Newton), is trying to rotate the crankcase and everything it is bolted to (that’d be the rest of the bike), in the opposite direction.
As the piston pushes the crank throw downwards, it is pushing the cylinder head upwards with the same force, so if there is sufficient resistance to acceleration of the crankshaft to reduce (or on an extreme case prevent), tha crank rotation, then the engine will rotate around the crank.
In Stone Age terms, instead of the piston pushing the crank away from the head, it’ll push the head away from the crank.
Back a few years, I suggested that here on WG and was largely criticised by home taught mechanical engineers for suggesting such a ludicrous notion.

In conclusion..?
Reversing rotating masses through gearing, does NOT alter the direction of the torque reaction….

[lucian]

the crank rotation is reversed so the final drive rotation is correct due to the trans. primary shaft being driven by a gear on the clutch cage . .

[Huzo]

the crank rotation is reversed so the final drive rotation is correct due to the introduction of a counter shaft . nothing new here Pete.  Take a look at the exploded views

Yeah Lucian, although I had not looked, that would seem quite self explanatory.
My rant was simply to refresh an old sticking point and bring it closer to the front of some luminaries minds. Because someone somewhere is going to say (again), that the clutch is rotated in reverse to the crank (or some other misguided piece of conventional wisdom), to “reduce torque effect…..”..
It WILL happen….

[lucian]

It's really gyroscopic forces at play , a counter rotating mass of equivalent volume will cancel out the axillary reaction of the primary rotating force. in this case the crankshaft and transmission primary . It can never be 100 percent because of the forces lost to trying to reverse the initial  inertia .

[Moparnut72]

It seems to Honda did many years ago with the Goldwing for this very reason. At least that was what was reported. They made a big deal about it at the time.
kk
kk

[auzziguzzi]

here's your answer, note the tilt left on throttle pulses

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpRH5PDOLIA

Gentlemen : thank you for your input.  Anti-clockwise it is, then.

The video demonstrates, by virtue of the throttle-blipping torque reaction, that the V100 crankshaft rotates anti-clockwise when viewed from the front of the motorcycle.
Confirmed by the directional arrow shown on the crankshaft-mounted Phonic Wheel (Item 21 in Table 03.120 of the Parts Book).
Confirmed by the placement of the chain tensioner, assuming it bears on the unloaded chain run.

Back to the drawing board, so to speak, to muse on the plethora of things that whirr, rattle and hum in that motor.

[lucian]

reverse it once, you have to reverse it again somewhere down the drivetrain, (or you’ll end up with your back wheel going backwards..!

Not if the the initial crank rotation is reversed

[Huzo]

reverse it once, you have to reverse it again somewhere down the drivetrain, (or you’ll end up with your back wheel going backwards..!

Not if the the initial crank rotation is reversed , and the trans input is driven by the  countershaft, the direction  will be correct for a conventional two shaft gearbox and rear  shaft drive pinion.

In the case of the V100 yes, because the crank is spun in reverse from the get go.
My point is, that the mere act of reversing spinning masses down the drive train, does not negate the tilting phenomenon.

[lucian]

In the case of the V100 yes, because the crank is spun in reverse from the get go.
My point is, that the mere act of reversing spinning masses down the drive train, does not negate the tilting phenomenon.

Call me confused as that is exactly the purpose of a counter shaft??

[lucian]

I understand your point Pete , the torque induced  tilt is not negated , only diminished  by the counter shaft and  shifted to the opposite side by this example. I like how you follow thru and keep us on our toes. 

[Huzo]

Call me confused as that is exactly the purpose of a counter shaft??

Is the clutch axis offset to the crank laterally ?
If so, then the driving gears would reverse the direction.

[Huzo]

I understand your point Pete , the torque induced  tilt is not negated , only diminished  by the counter shaft and  shifted to the opposite side by this example. I like how you follow thru and keep us on our toes. 

The tilt is generated by the conrods pushing against the inertia of the crank and associated masses reacting against the heads.
The mass of the crankcase and anything that is not rotating with the drive line, is experiencing an equal and opposite torque.
A further example.
If you were floating in water face down and operating a boring device like a hand brace similar to crankshaft, the resistance of the drill would cause you to rotate in the opposite direction.
The brace and bit is the crank, you are the crankcase.

Think of it that way if it helps…

[jacksonracingcomau]

The tilt is generated by the conrods pushing against the inertia of the crank and associated masses reacting against the heads.
The mass of the crankcase and anything that is not rotating with the drive line, is experiencing an equal and opposite torque.
A further example.
If you were floating in water face down and operating a boring device like a hand brace similar to crankshaft, the resistance of the drill would cause you to rotate in the opposite direction.
The brace and bit is the crank, you are the crankcase.

Think of it that way if it helps…

Just maybe , they fixed a problem WE never had, was a good way to tell idgits they missed a gear
Now explain the return to non floating rear drive box
Norge v V85 ?
Was all the rage only 20 or 30 years ago, now not needed, back as it was
Hey, I said it then, this is similar, clever indeed but ,,,,,,,,,

[auzziguzzi]

But I'm somewhat puzzled by the Primary Drive. 
Referring to Table 03.160, is the Primary pinion driven directly by the crankshaft gear or is it driven by the counter balancer gear?

I've come to the conclusion that the Primary Drive / Cush Drive (Item 1 Table 03.230) is not driven by any gear but instead engages splines in the rear of the crankshaft.  Correct me if I'm wrong.

Given that we've established that the crankshaft rotates anti-clockwise (viewed from the front), my understanding, now, is that there are only three shaft axes in the engine unit that are involved in motive power transmission.

They are :
* primary shaft - driven directly off the back of the crank (not via any gear as I first assumed).  It drives the Clutch Hub.
* gearbox input shaft - driven by the Clutch Drum / Engine Gear pair.  Together they form the Primary Gear Ratio for the motorcycle.
* gearbox output shaft - driven by one of the six selectable ratios.

I think you folk knew this all along.  It just took me a while to get there coz I went down a few rabbit holes along the way.

[LowRyter]

Gentlemen : thank you for your input.  Anti-clockwise it is, then.

The video demonstrates, by virtue of the throttle-blipping torque reaction, that the V100 crankshaft rotates anti-clockwise when viewed from the front of the motorcycle.
Confirmed by the directional arrow shown on the crankshaft-mounted Phonic Wheel (Item 21 in Table 03.120 of the Parts Book).
Confirmed by the placement of the chain tensioner, assuming it bears on the unloaded chain run.

Back to the drawing board, so to speak, to muse on the plethora of things that whirr, rattle and hum in that motor.

The engine dips the wrong way?   I'm out.

A Guzzi should be a Guzzi.

[Huzo]

The engine dips the wrong way?   I'm out.

A Guzzi should be a Guzzi.

Designed for the Southern Hemisphere

[Huzo]

Throttle increases revs on my bikes, clutched or not, doesn’t yours ?

Yes..(you know it does), but not in 0.2 seconds.
And remember, without a disengaged clutch, even if a blip of the throttle DID increase the revs on the ENGINE side of  the gearbox, it would also do the same to the OUTPUT shaft side…( that’s why your wife reputedly fell off…) linear acceleration being what it is.
You need to increase the revs at the engine while keeping the output shaft at the SAME rpm.
This allows for the new ratio.

NOW.
Going to the races and watching what they do, will not alter anything.
I once heard Valentino Rossi say that.
“Ahhh yes (tugs earring)..For sure I put my weight on the one foot peg to move the centre of gravity…” ! 
The C of G will ALWAYS  be equally distributed each side of the point of support on a one track vehicle.
If that makes no sense, then there’s a book that needs to be read.
Point is…
Race riders are (usually) fast, that does not mean that the know WHY they are fast with respect to Physics…

[jacksonracingcomau]

Yes..(you know it does), but not in 0.2 seconds.
And remember, without a disengaged clutch, even if a blip of the throttle DID increase the revs on the ENGINE side of  the gearbox, it would also do the same to the OUTPUT shaft side…( that’s why your wife reputedly fell off…) linear acceleration being what it is.
You need to increase the revs at the engine while keeping the output shaft at the SAME rpm.
This allows for the new ratio.

NOW.
Going to the races and watching what they do, will not alter anything.
I once heard Valentino Rossi say that.
“Ahhh yes (tugs earring)..For sure I put my weight on the one foot peg to move the centre of gravity…” ! 
The C of G will ALWAYS  be equally distributed each side of the point of support on a one track vehicle.
If that makes no sense, then there’s a book that needs to be read.
Point is…
Race riders are (usually) fast, that does not mean that the know WHY they are fast with respect to Physics…

When you beat him, let us know
Weighting pegs works for me too, no need to explain, sort of obvious

[Huzo]

When you beat him, let us know
Weighting pegs works for me too, no need to explain, sort of obvious

You have no idea what I actually mean.
None….
When you are in a turn, the force trying to throw you towards the outside like you would feel in a car, exactly equals the horizontal component of the weight through the centreline of the bike in the opposite direction.
If you want to put more weight on the inside peg (for example), you can of course, but you will then stand the bike up a little more as a result.
The centre of mass is still through the centreline of the bike viewed from the front (or back).
If you ride along straight, standing on the pegs with the bike dead vertical, then lift your right foot off the peg, you’ll either place more weight on your right hand (therefore keeping the C of M centralised), or lean the bike to the right for the same result.
Either way the centre of mass has not shifted.

While you’re cuddled nice and safely in VR’s shadow, think about this…

If the combined centre of mass of the bike AND rider, is not directly in line with the wheels, there will be a resultant vector either dropping you on the low side and you’ll crash, or high side and you’ll be thrown to the outside.
Whether Valentino is faster or slower than me is irrelevant, it’s just a lame statement used by you ‘cause you cannot hold your own in the discussion.
Neil de Grasse Tyson knows more about the Physics that keeps Rossi upright on the track than he Rossi does, but I know who’s faster.
I believe that when ANY rider says he “puts weight on the inside peg..” he really means he’s hanging off, to take advantage of the obvious (to most), benefits that it brings.


stop all the clocks poem

You’ll notice your hero’s arse is considerably inside the turn yet the C of M is on the centreline where it must be, that’s because the bike is slightly more upright to cater for it.
Knowing you are fast is easy, just look at the time sheets.
But don’t BS yourself into thinking you know why….

[Huzo]

Weighting pegs works for me too, no need to explain, sort of obvious

Yep, seen that tactic before…
“I do what Rossi does, wanna’ argue with him…” ?
But for the benefit of the great unwashed, could you try once for me…? 
Or were you bluffing ?

[kingoffleece]

Good explanation by HUZO on what one may refer to as a paradox............ ........

[rocker59]

The engine dips the wrong way?   I'm out.

A Guzzi should be a Guzzi.

Since the clutch spins the other way, I think the torque reaction we're accustomed to will be negligible in the new V100 line.

[Huzo]

Good explanation by HUZO on what one may refer to as a paradox............ ........

Mate, it’s just that the centre of mass is a combination of ALL that is present.
Bike and rider.
We’ve all seen the performer at a circus, standing with both feet on one peg, the bike leaning away from him at an extreme angle and him at a similar angle the opposite way.
If viewed from the front, you’d notice that the centre of mass is between the bike and rider.
The wheels do not know or care how the mass is piled on the top, as long as the system is balanced.

Think of this.
If you stand straight up with both arms out each side horizontally you can balance quite ok. Now if someone places a 10 kg weight in one hand, you have to lean off to the opposite side to counterbalance the weight that you’re supporting, like carrying one bucket of water, your centre of mass has to be directly over your feet. Your head is off to one side and the bucket is off to the other side, but the centre of mass stays put.

[rocker59]

   I imagine a tb balance may be a bit of a chore.

Don't you think it's an automotive style 52mm dual throttle body in a single housing that will require little or no balance adjustment ??

[Huzo]

Since the clutch spins the other way, I think the torque reaction we're accustomed to will be negligible in the new V100 line.

If it is, it’ll be because the internal masses are less. (Reduced inertia).
Still with a name like Rocker, you might be the only one worth listening to on that topic..

[kingoffleece]

Love the tech talk and discussions.  Wish I had more to offer-I'm at a basic level-but still able to learn!

[auzziguzzi]

Since the clutch spins the other way, I think the torque reaction we're accustomed to will be negligible in the new V100 line.

Agree that IF the clutch spins counter to the crankshaft THEN it will reduce the torque reaction resulting from blipping the throttle.

The question is : does the clutch spin counter to the crankshaft?

The clutch needs to spin anti-clockwise to turn the rear wheel forwards.
To see this :
Refer to Parts Book Table 03.230 which shows Item 1, Primary / Cush Drive, driving the clutch directly.
Refer to Parts Book Table 03.180 which shows the downstream power train to the gearbox output shaft.

IF the crankshaft spins anti-clockwise, viewed from the front, THEN the clutch is spinning in the SAME direction as the crankshaft.
An anti-clockwise crankshaft also implies that the crankshaft drives the Primary / Cush shaft directly, not through any gearing.

The jury is still out to a certain extent because, so far, we only have evidence that the engine spins anti-clockwise (a video of throttle blipping, a direction arrow on the phonic wheel, placement of timing chain tensioners).  We don't have proof.

Also, we're trying to perform a virtual assembly of an engine from an exploded parts diagram.

Yeah. I know. I need to get a life.

[averb]

Don't you think it's an automotive style 52mm dual throttle body in a single housing that will require little or no balance adjustment ??

The parts list shows 2 Throttle bodies



image upload