you will always have the torque and antitorque (countertorque for GuyF
) to contend with, but i still maintain that
this action can be mitigated by the position of the mounting system
the balance will remain the same regardless of load, but the torque action and reaction will change with variances in loading
i wish i had a single to work this theory out and prove out the concept
with the base mounting system, this torque action (and reaction) will cause the base to move as if the engine has balance issues
when (if balanced to begin with) it does not.
i would dearly love to see that engine in the film mounted to a cradle system and running at load, it would expect it to quiver a bit
but certainly no jumping up and down.
my business partner has a 10/1, maybe i can talk him out of it, or talk him into a teardown and balance, followed by a cradle mount system
just to see the end result.
the other interesting thing to note in the film is the engine does not seem to move in a piroette fashion, which tells me they have done a very
nice job of balancing that engine.
we now know what is possible as far as making a listeroid behave and sit still, it certainly would appear that the engine would not need anywhere near a ton of
crete to do a very nice job of running just fine, perhaps the 605 lb spec of the 5/1 would be more than sufficient.
i don't see any reason that engine could not be resiliently mounted and run just as long as it would if bolted to a block of stone. the result would be an engine that would not transmit much in the way of objectionable vibrations to anywhere else in the structure.
bob g
bob g