Talk:Fluid coupling

	This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Technology This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology 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.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers. This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist. [[Preselector gearbox#Wilson gearbox|Wilson self-changing gearbox]] The anchor (#Wilson gearbox) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before. Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

I had always assumed that the Vulcan-Sinclair hydraulic coupling (popular on early British diesel locomotives) was a product of the Vulcan Foundry in England. However, it appears that it was actually A. G. Vulcan in Germany. I don't know enough German to translate the German Wikipedia articles but, if somebody else can, it would be interesting. The relevant articles are [1] [2] [3]. Biscuittin (talk) 18:19, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the link is in Hermann Föttinger in german wiki.he worked in the shipyard.Wdl1961 (talk) 16:20, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I want to shop a fluid hydraulik coupling Type MD 32 and power 24 kW ,1460RPM with capacity 5.2 L I want to know how much are the price Best wishes Mahir

Mahir Alhaydar (talk) 13:48, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"The very best efficiency a fluid coupling can achieve is 94 percent" Where does this 94 percent number comes from??? Shouldn't this be completely dependend on the actual slip, used fluid, construction and size of the coupling, etc. ?? GuntherS (talk) 14:24, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a theoretical limit. Issues like fluid internal friction reduce the actual efficiency down from this figure.

The proof isn't simple, but does deserve inclusion. It might be in Fottinger's patents, or it will be in a decent undergrad-level fluid dynamics textbook. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:00, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The device being discussed is formally known as a hydrodynamic coupling. The term “hydraulic coupling” is ambiguous as best, as it doesn’t differentiate between hydrodynamic and hydrostatic.

216.152.18.132 (talk) 23:10, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]