View Full Version : pic: 6wd chassis
[cdm-description=photo]32021[/cdm-description]
sdcantrell56
09-11-2008, 14:47
This is an excellent job of listening to advice and incorporating the changes to make a superior product. Overall I think this is a great design so far. How thick are the plates? It looks like 1/8".
why thank you, but i still need to make a change i realized that by moving a standoff in order to cut the corners of the chassis it will now get in the way of the wheels
gorrilla
09-11-2008, 17:39
(edit) i looked at the other picture, answered my question
ironbears
09-11-2008, 17:53
to keep it safe and save money try to use 1/4" plate. looks great
sdcantrell56
09-11-2008, 17:55
How would 1/4" plate save money over 1/8" plate?
gorrilla
09-11-2008, 17:58
also it is steel or aluminum?
also it is steel or aluminum?
Aluminum if it is a 1/4" inch or 1/8" plates. No STEEL unless it is that really awesome thin-wall stuff.
How would 1/4" plate save money over 1/8" plate? It wouldn't.
Andrew Schreiber
09-11-2008, 20:01
It wouldn't.
Well, it would if you kept breaking it and having to replace it. Obviously you need to make sure that 1/8 is strong enough to do what you want. You do NOT want to be burning money having to replace parts because they werent designed properly.
sdcantrell56
09-11-2008, 20:24
1/4" thick is always more expensive because it is more material. In the age of bumpers, a properly supported 1/8" plate will more than stand up to the abuses of FIRST. If you want to increase the strength substantially without increasing weight by too much you could bend the plates on the top and bottom to create a flange. This will increase the stiffness of the plate dramatically.
1/4" thick is always more expensive because it is more material. In the age of bumpers, a properly supported 1/8" plate will more than stand up to the abuses of FIRST. If you want to increase the strength substantially without increasing weight by too much you could bend the plates on the top and bottom to create a flange. This will increase the stiffness of the plate dramatically.
Flanges are pretty awesome things. Here on 148, we like them. If you have access to sheet-metal or metal bending capabilities, it will help you make all kinds of very strong, very light pieces.
To paraphrase Ferris Bueller:
"They are SO choice. If you have the means, I highly recommend adding a few."
kramarczyk
09-11-2008, 22:31
If you have the patience to dig through it, there are a number of examples on how the location of material affects the strength and stiffness of a beam in this thread. http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67605
it is 1/8" alluminum 5052 alloy, so it is harder and stronger then other alloys.
it is 1/8" alluminum 5052 alloy, so it is harder and stronger then other alloys.
Why not use 2024 or 7075 if your not welding anything to those pieces. 7075 sheets have a brinell of 150 and a yield of 65 ksi.
Brandon Holley
10-11-2008, 00:33
To paraphrase Ferris Bueller:
"They are SO choice. If you have the means, I highly recommend adding a few."
Nice.
And I agree with JVN here...flanges are an awesome way to strengthen something up and keep it light.
Nice.
And I agree with JVN here...flanges are an awesome way to strengthen something up and keep it light.
It would help to see some pics of this properly implemented.
AdamHeard
10-11-2008, 01:25
Why not use 2024 or 7075 if your not welding anything to those pieces. 7075 sheets have a brinell of 150 and a yield of 65 ksi.
It's not always a matter of "X material has a higher yield than Y material".
5052 is commonly used in sheet metal applications as it is much easier to bend and flange. Yes, 7075 is harder and has a higher yield strength.... but, good luck shaping it as easily as 5052. In fact, the low radius bends you see on most sheet metal parts in FIRST (148, 228, Kitbot frame) would probably crack 7075 rather than nicely bend it.
It's not always a matter of "X material has a higher yield than Y material".
5052 is commonly used in sheet metal applications as it is much easier to bend and flange. Yes, 7075 is harder and has a higher yield strength.... but, good luck shaping it as easily as 5052. In fact, the low radius bends you see on most sheet metal parts in FIRST (148, 228, Kitbot frame) would probably crack 7075 rather than nicely bend it.
I didn't think he was going to bend it, as shown in his CAD drawing. Yes you are right about the 7075 cracking.
AdamHeard
10-11-2008, 01:42
I didn't think he was going to bend it, as shown in his CAD drawing. Yes you are right about the 7075 cracking.
The next logical iteration in the design (supported by some recommendations by some knowledgeable people) would have been to flange it.
Using 7075 or 7068 for the sideplates of a drivetrain is a total waste of money and complete overkill in my (not) so humble opinion. Tons of people have made similar designs with plain old 6061 and it works just fine.
It's always better to figure out why a design actually works and the best ways to implement it than to just assume upgrading to a "better" material will make everything work.
sdcantrell56
10-11-2008, 09:00
I completely agree with you cory. The only places where I see 7075 as having a noticeable impact on performance is on gears and shafts where strength is very important and there is a constant load working on the shaft. Adding flanges to the sideplates will increases the stiffness much more than just switching to 7075 aluminum. Also 7075 is very expensive stuff.
If anyone wants to see flanges, look at my last drivetrain I posted http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/32013?
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.