Will do, thanks Pmack!
That is like stating "Motorcycles are faster than cars", not necessarily true.Titanium is less stiff than steel, and ....
I was dead wrong I guess, so I apologize Mr. Moore. I was thinking strength to weight.Right there in the Wiki link it shows the Youngs Modulus of Ti as 116GPa
shows it as 114 GPa, and carbon/low alloy steels about 200 GPa. The modulus of elasticity will vary a bit depending on alloying elements, but not a great deal, and it is the number you want to look at for stiffness.
"Modulus of elasticity (or also referred to as Young’s modulus) is the ratio of stress to strain in elastic range of deformation. For typical metals, modulus of elasticity is in the range between 45 GPa (6.5 x 106 psi) to 407 GPa (59 x 106 psi). Modulus of elasticity is also a measure of material's stiffness or resistance to elastic deformation. If the Young modulus of metal is greater, it's stiffer. Modulus of elasticity is an important design factor for metals for calculations of elastic deflections. "
So Ti is roughly 50-60% as stiff as the steels are. Don't confuse Ti's high strength to weight ratio with stiffness. If you can increase the section of the part to get a higher second moment of area then you can end up with a strong/light/stiff part from titanium (which also goes for aluminum which is about 75% the stiffness of Ti). But size for size, Ti is much less stiff than steel (ask the engineers at BSA who messed that up and lost the world open MX championship in the 1960s when they duplicated the steel frame of the works bike in Ti tube of the same size. It was lighter, but flexed enough to throw the chain 1-2X a lap.)
When substituting different materials in a part you need to look at a variety of physical properties to see which one Mr. Murphy is going to use to mess up your plans.
No need to apologize to me, I've been wrong plenty of times and I expect I'll be wrong in the future. It is easy to be wrong. The difficult part is recognizing it and learning what you need to do to be right (or at least less wrong). The older I get, the more I've started hedging my statements in case I've forgotten what little "right knowledge" that I've learned.I was dead wrong I guess, so I apologize Mr. Moore. I was thinking strength to weight.
How does shear Modulus come into play for axles?
Love those old Monsters! I've always been a fan of new stuff and always lived by the notion that "newer is better" when it comes to cars, motorcycles, and any sort of automotive or tech stuff, but those S2 and S4 Monsters are still badass even by today's standards! If I was to buy an older bike now, it would be one of those.Lol! That axel was an extravagance for sure. But I was doing a make over on the bike snd stumbled across it and couldn’t pass it up. It’s a 2006 Ducati Monster S2R1000. I got it down to 330 lb wet and 110 rear wheel hp. It’s a blast to ride.
I have to correct myself. I checked my notes. The bike now weighs 360 wet. I thought that sounded too light.
I bet you are pretty particular about who changes tires on those! They are TRICK!