Lodger - reed stiffness is one of the hardest elements to model correctly - mainly as its not possible to enter added backups ( continuously varying with lift ) influences on the petal action.
In short the only way to do this , and get realistic results , is to use the modulus defaults - then adjust the petal thickness to get close to the recomended first mode rpm.
Then watch the intake screen during a sim run.
One of two scenarios will happen , if the input thickness is too thin , the petal tip will either hit the stop or overbend.
In this case the lift height shown will vary hugely from one iteration to the next ie the output is unstable.
If the thickness is too big , the max lift will be limited , and power drops due to insufficient curtain area.
Max lift should generally be no more than 1/3 the free length.
If you adjust the thickness to just short of hitting the stop , or use the 1/3 guide to be close to unstable , this will be the optimum petal stiffness .
This method in reality only takes out any " bad " influence the reed may have on results - it doesnt tell you the optimum reed dimensions.
So sadly , the only way to actually get the best reed setup is hours of dyno testing.
Sim results dont show any output like using a gram scale to determine tip lift pull pressure.
I use a small digital gram scale to point me in the right direction on stiffness when changing the main petals thickness and or backup pressure /length.
Then going too stiff , will eventually limit top end , or going too soft will eventually ruin the mid.
Ive got a thing thats unique and new.To prove it I'll have the last laugh on you.Cause instead of one head I got two.And you know two heads are better than one.
Bookmarks