I'm designing a custom part that needs an active shock absorber and space is restricted. I most likely won't be able to use a stock absorber and was thinking, can two squarish tubes be made tight enough?
Asked
Active
Viewed 38 times
1
-
Anything can be made accurately enough with enough money. It's much easier to make round precision parts, though, particularly bores. Instead of asking us, ask your machine shop. – TimWescott Aug 19 '19 at 01:31
-
Would a square ram be more likely to jam through a rotating load? – Solar Mike Aug 19 '19 at 05:15
-
@TimWescott I don't have a machine shop. – akauppi Aug 20 '19 at 16:21
1 Answers
3
Assuming reasonable pressures, it should be workable.
However, keep in mind that the pressures will be higher at the corners and you'll run a higher risk of leakage / bursting. Cylindrical tubes distribute the pressure evenly across the bearing surface and don't have that issue.
You'll also potentially have difficulty with fabricating a gasket to seal the space between the square tubes.
Given the minimal difference in surface area between a cylindrical and square tube, and the ready prevalence of cylindrical tubes, it does beg the question as to why you feel a square tube is the more appropriate design choice.
-
The thinking of square tube came from space constraints (I may end up making a custom integrated part instead of stock tubes) and from the wish it would prevent axial rotation. However, thinking about this more I think the mere shape is not enough to remove rotation, since the two sides of the cylinder won't actually meet due to tightenings). I'll look at stock cylinders and/or make mine round. – akauppi Aug 19 '19 at 06:34
-
@ GlenH7: I’m very curious why you are mentioning that the pressure will be higher in the corners. I thought that in a hydraulic chamber the pressure is in every point the same. I rather think you mean the tension in the material of the piston could be higher. Perhaps you can clarify. Thanks. – tueftla Aug 20 '19 at 08:58