On Mon, 10 Jun 1996 JackiHarry@aol.com wrote:
> On 6/10/96, scotty@csn.net (Scott Paisley) wrote:
>
> >In a pinch, couldn't you take a new ring, measure the gap at the top
> >of the bore, then push the ring down to the bottom, and measure the
> >gap there. If you get different gap readings, then you have a taper.
>
> >Seriously, would this be an accurate way to measure taper?
> >-Scotty
>
>
> Yes, it is if the cyl is round (usually it is close enough to get a
> reasonable reading) Use a piston to push ring down to make sure it is even.
> Amount of taper should be Pi times greater than increase in ring gap, and I
> usually measured it (by whatever method) at the top, bottom, and 1/2 & 3/4
> ways up. one advantage of using a ring is you can find the location of the
> greatest wear easily. (Usually at the top & second ring locations w/ the
> piston near TDC)
>
> Scott M Ryan
>
I want to correct a slip of the tongue, er, finger. The taper, if by
taper you mean the change of cylinder diameter, should be the number of
thousandths by which the ring gap changes *divided by* pi.
I think the disadvantage of this is that cylinders don't wear perfectly
cylindrically. The ring gap change should give you an average taper,
which is presumably less than the greatest taper.
Ray Gibbons Dept. of Molecular Physiology & Biophysics
Univ. of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington, VT
gibbons@northpole.med.uvm.edu (802) 656-8910
|