Question for math boffs - serp belt size
Question for math boffs - serp belt size
jimxms So, if the belt makes contact with exactly half of the pulley
a = 64mm (2.55")
b = 57mm (2.25")
a/2 = 32mm
b/2 = 28.5mm
32-28.5 = 3.5mm
That right?
sprinter2012 Don't take this as gospel, but it makes sense in my head...
You need to work out the circumference of the part of the pulley that the belt will sit on for the old and new pulleys...
Old Pulley Circumference = a
New Pulley Circumference = b
Then half them both, so now you have a/2 and b/2
Then do (a/2)-(b/2) which will tell you how much shorter the belt needs to be :thumbup:
jimxms So, if the belt makes contact with exactly half of the pulley
a = 64mm (2.55")
b = 57mm (2.25")
a/2 = 32mm
b/2 = 28.5mm
32-28.5 = 3.5mm
That right?
sprinter2012 Don't take this as gospel, but it makes sense in my head...
You need to work out the circumference of the part of the pulley that the belt will sit on for the old and new pulleys...
Old Pulley Circumference = a
New Pulley Circumference = b
Then half them both, so now you have a/2 and b/2
Then do (a/2)-(b/2) which will tell you how much shorter the belt needs to be :thumbup:
Aaah yes, well corected Stoney. I haden't realised the 2.55 and 2.25 were diameters.
Does make sense now I think about it because they would be some pretty small pulleys if they were the circumference!
But as you have rightly edited in the equation, just multiplying the values by Pi corrects the whole thing :thumbup1:
sprinter2012 Aaah yes, well corected Stoney. I haden't realised the 2.55 and 2.25 were diameters.
sprinter2012 Aaah yes, well corected Stoney. I haden't realised the 2.55 and 2.25 were diameters.
Well at least now 2 of us have had an input and come to the same conclusion Jim should feel a bit more confident in getting his new belt
DISCLAIMER: I still take no responsibility for any wrong belt sizes and consequent profanities this may cause