Talk:Hydraulic cylinder

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Fluid Dynamics Taskforce.

Untitled

Does the number of strokes in a telescoping piston affect the power delivered? Is there a way to "compound" the effect, as in steam compounding? Trekphiler 03:20, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Compound steam engines make use of the expansive property of steam. As hydraulic fluid expands very little, there would be no point in using compounding in a hydraulic machine. Biscuittin (talk) 21:17, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking less of the expansion than the ability to shorten the piston stroke by "nesting" pistons; does this multiply the power? Or make no difference? Trekphiler (talk) 22:07, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are talking about force, rather than power. Whether "nesting" pistons multiplies the force, I'm not sure. Can anyone else help? Biscuittin (talk) 17:45, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"talking about force"? Very possibly, seeing how ignorant I am of physics... Trekphiler (talk) 21:08, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I were designing a hydraulic machine, I would decide how much force I needed and then select the piston size to match. I think the reason for using telescoping pistons is not to multiply the force but to save space. A telescoping piston, when closed, will be much shorter than a single one. However, I'm not a physicist and I could be wrong. Biscuittin (talk) 09:07, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's my thinking: if I've only got "x" space, how much is the max output I can deliver? Trekphiler (talk) 22:58, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested page move to "Hydraulic Actuator"

The word "Cylinder" doesn't distinguish between a master cylinder which is a source of hydraulic pressure and a slave cylinder which is an actuator and the subject of this article. Your thoughts? Petecarney (talk) 09:49, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Usually these types of cylinders are driven by a pump not a master cylinder. Master cylinders are commonly found on cars. In that application the slave cylinder is used to apply mostly force and a slight bit of movement. These cylinders are designed for motion and force. Wizard191 (talk) 14:33, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heat engines navbox

The navbox Template:Heat engines was recently added, then removed, from this page; FYI it was added because this article is linked to from that navbox (although it is from the link called "Double acting/differential cylinder"). In case that wasn't obvious, perhaps it should be to added it back. Or maybe there was some other reason to remove it? David Hollman (Talk) 07:12, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was the one who removed the navbox, on the grounds that a simple hydraulic cylinder isn't a heat engine. That navbox is rather confused in everything it throws together, but the place to fix that is at the navbox, not by treating it as a reference for adding it by implication to everything that it links to. Nor is the current hydraulic cylinder a great target for an explanation of a differential cylinder. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:32, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation. I've adjusted the navbox link as well so people are not misdirected to the wrong topic. In the future you might want to make comments about things like this on the navbox talk page (or just fix it); deleting it without a clear explanation was a little confusing. Thanks. David Hollman (Talk) 11:51, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Plungercylinder.png Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Plungercylinder.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 02:20, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merging hydraulic/pneumatic cylinder, linear actuator

I am proposing a merger between linear actuator, hydraulic cylinder, and pneumatic cylinder, though what form exactly, that needs to be worked out. Please discuss this on the Linear actuator talk page.

It looks like these engineering articles are being developed along the specific lines of knowledge that people have developed within their particular field of study, rather than as an encompassing view that includes similar aspects across all fields.

It's very unclear to me why we need two huge separate articles for hydraulic cylinders and pneumatic cylinders, when the biggest difference between them can be described as "this one's filled with liquid" and "this one's filled with gas".

Otherwise, they're basically identical in many other respects: single acting, double acting, reverse acting, single acting spring return, welded, tie rod. And then there's the topics that apply to all linear actuators including electric/screw actuators, like side loading.

It seems both the hydraulic and pneumatic articles should be slimmed down considerably and the duplicate content moved somewhere else, possibly to the linear actuator article, or maybe to a new more generic term that just covers cylinders such as an article or subsection in the linear actuator article called "Cylinder linear actuators".

Please discuss this on the Linear actuator talk page. -- DMahalko (talk) 18:40, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Minor composition correction in "Operation"

I propose replacing "brings in" with 'delivers' in the third paragraph to improve composition quality. Comments and refinements welcome of course. If none after a few days I'll invoke the change. --H Bruce Campbell (talk) 22:28, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Since no objections appeared I edited the article as described. But comments and refinements remain eagerly welcome of course. --H Bruce Campbell (talk) 09:07, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

Wait, that say "welded" or "weirded"? Oh, it says "welded".Pointless Math Learner (talk) 21:47, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Differential piston section is confusing

I had to read it several times to understand what was being described and what the relation to plunger cylinders was supposed to be. Eventually I figured out that it was that the force was related to rod area but since the plunger cylinder section also describes units with pistons rather than just full diameter rods I feel like that could be clarified — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.102.198.130 (talk) 18:40, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]