My bad on reference to P/C links. But I’m still curious. How will the use of strain gauges on separate structures (lift rods) provide a correlated result to the gauge installed on the rotating mast?
If using a typical mast strain gauge bonded to the mast pole surface as the benchmark, how would you correct for the cyclic loading effects of any mechanical/elastomeric bearing component installed on the lift rod? Or the acceptable play tolerances on the internal xsmn gears/bearings that drive the mast?
I just don’t understand the why of comparing the mast moment measurement at a limited number of stationary points farther from the center of rotation, with multiple variables; to a measurement taken through a rotating system at the center of rotation, with one variable (bonding integrity of the strain gauge on mast).
If the intent is purely a theoretical exercise, well OK. But if the intent is to develop a new way to operationally measure the MM, then I would recommend staying with the current system and improving the reliability of its components.
W1