Chief Delphi

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   Extra Discussion (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=68)
-   -   pic: 3 CIM WCD Ball Shifter CAD (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=131303)

Bryce2471 01-12-2014 10:04

pic: 3 CIM WCD Ball Shifter CAD
 

Arpan 01-12-2014 10:06

Re: pic: 3 CIM WCD Ball Shifter CAD
 
Those ratios are just about perfect.

Have you considered trying to make the Cims or shafts removable to facilitate easy gearbox removal?

Also, you may want more than just the two holes in the WCD block to mount the gearbox to the tube. Two more holes higher up on the gearbox would add a lot of strength.

jagoldman 01-12-2014 10:40

Re: pic: 3 CIM WCD Ball Shifter CAD
 
That is a great looking gearbox!


I have a few questions though...

1) How much does it weigh?
2) What are the actual gears that are being used? The tooth count would be good, no need for product numbers.
3) How do you plan on mounting the gearbox?

JesseK 01-12-2014 10:57

Re: pic: 3 CIM WCD Ball Shifter CAD
 
It is as if Bryce's and R.C.'s two minds are like one. All that's missing are wave washers and an adjustable CIM mount for multiple CIM pinion options. The standoffs are slightly nested into the side plates for extra alignment support, but that's probably optional if there are other supports.

This makes me wonder if we can simply replace the output shaft and output gears on the WCP gearbox with their ball-shifting counterparts to get something that works with minimal modifications.

Arpan 01-12-2014 11:14

Re: pic: 3 CIM WCD Ball Shifter CAD
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by JesseK (Post 1410851)

This makes me wonder if we can simply replace the output shaft and output gears on the WCP gearbox with their ball-shifting counterparts to get something that works with minimal modifications.

Why would you do that? What advantages do ballshifters have?

I seem to recall that ballshifters wear out faster ,but I could be wrong there.

JesseK 01-12-2014 11:23

Re: pic: 3 CIM WCD Ball Shifter CAD
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Arpan (Post 1410852)
Why would you do that? What advantages do ballshifters have?

I seem to recall that ballshifters wear out faster ,but I could be wrong there.

Faster shift-on-the-fly. Yet I agree there are tradeoffs, and I don't me to imply I'm entertaining executing the idea, but rather mulling over its possibility.

Chris is me 01-12-2014 11:51

Re: pic: 3 CIM WCD Ball Shifter CAD
 
I think the lightening on the plates is just a bit too aggressive. Reducing weight is nice and all but you still want to keep your gearbox rigid and strong. I would thicken the webs and probably add another horizontal web(s) between the edge and the bearing for the first reduction. Just seems like not a lot of support to me. If you're that desperate to save a couple of ounces, lighten the gears before you lighten the sideplates that aggressively.

I would also be concerned about how little you are supporting the top CIM on this gearbox.

AdamHeard 01-12-2014 13:16

Re: pic: 3 CIM WCD Ball Shifter CAD
 
I have my doubts about the press fit into the end of the ballshifter shaft in such a configuration.

Bryce2471 01-12-2014 13:40

Re: pic: 3 CIM WCD Ball Shifter CAD
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Arpan (Post 1410843)
Have you considered trying to make the Cims or shafts removable to facilitate easy gearbox removal?

Also, you may want more than just the two holes in the WCD block to mount the gearbox to the tube. Two more holes higher up on the gearbox would add a lot of strength.

The Cims are already removable. (although not very easily) I've considered making the gearbox removable, but I haven't come up with anything slick yet.
Quote:

Originally Posted by jagoldman (Post 1410847)
1) How much does it weigh?
2) What are the actual gears that are being used? The tooth count would be good, no need for product numbers.
3) How do you plan on mounting the gearbox?

It weighs 1.9 lbs without motors and 10.5 with them according to inventor.
First stage is 12 to 54, second stage low is 24 to 60, and second stage high is 40 to 44.
It's mounted with the standard bearing block and the two bolts the are out to the sides.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Arpan (Post 1410852)
I seem to recall that ballshifters wear out faster ,but I could be wrong there.

The VEXpro ballshifter has a small aluminum shifting rod that tends to wear out. In this design, we would make out own out of steel for longevity.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris is me (Post 1410857)
I think the lightening on the plates is just a bit too aggressive. Reducing weight is nice and all but you still want to keep your gearbox rigid and strong.

That's just how I roll. If we're already going to be milling out the plates, why not optimize for the lowest weight reasonable?
Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamHeard (Post 1410865)
I have my doubts about the press fit into the end of the ballshifter shaft in such a configuration.

This uses a simple one piece output shaft. Machinable on a manual mill and lathe.

Thanks for all the great responses! Keep it up!

AdamHeard 01-12-2014 13:42

Re: pic: 3 CIM WCD Ball Shifter CAD
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryce2471 (Post 1410866)
This uses a simple one piece output shaft. Machinable on a manual mill and lathe.

Thanks for all the great responses! Keep it up!

Can you post a cross section of the shifting then?

Curious how that assembles if you've replaced their setup.

Chris is me 01-12-2014 13:54

Re: pic: 3 CIM WCD Ball Shifter CAD
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryce2471 (Post 1410866)
That's just how I roll. If we're already going to be milling out the plates, why not optimize for the lowest weight reasonable?

What I am saying is that your weight right now is potentially lower than reasonable. As you remove so much material, the gearbox becomes less rigid, and stuff will deflect away from each other under load. The CIM mounting is especially concerning as the moment applied by the mass of the motor will tend to bend the pinions away from the cluster gear, weakening both of them.

There's no reason to lighten a gearbox so aggressively when you have all that extra material in your gears that serves so much less function than the material you've removed from the gearbox. You could still have a heavily lightened gearbox, with just more material and better motor support. You would probably even have a net weight loss if you faced the gears and drilled some holes in them well below the root of the teeth in addition to adding material to the gearbox.

Bryce2471 01-12-2014 14:09

Re: pic: 3 CIM WCD Ball Shifter CAD
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris is me (Post 1410872)
The CIM mounting is especially concerning as the moment applied by the mass of the motor will tend to bend the pinions away from the cluster gear, weakening both of them.

There's no reason to lighten a gearbox so aggressively when you have all that extra material in your gears that serves so much less function than the material you've removed from the gearbox.

I don't see how the top motor is mounted less securely than the top motor of the WCP 3 CIM DS gearbox. In this design the plate is thinner, but the upper standoffs are closer to the CIM.

If I was going to lighten the gears, I would lighten them as much as reasonable too, but that is a different story.

Jared 01-12-2014 15:02

Re: pic: 3 CIM WCD Ball Shifter CAD
 
I agree with others who say that the top CIM isn't mounted well enough. Your gearbox might survive, but adding that extra support for 0.05 lbs gives you a lot more gearbox strength. The heavy CIM motor hanging off the end of the plate will cause the plate to deform, especially when your robot accelerates/decelerates really quickly during a collision.

If you look at many teams' gearbox plates, you'll notice that the plate outlines tend to be completely convex, rather than having little things sticking out. The outline is entirely made up of straight segments, and segments of circles that have their centers inside of the outline of the plate. This also adds a ton of strength, and requires the same size stock to machine from.

The top one is mounted in a weaker configuration because of the orientation of the mounting screws.

RonnieS 01-12-2014 15:50

Re: pic: 3 CIM WCD Ball Shifter CAD
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Arpan (Post 1410843)
Those ratios are just about perfect.

Have you considered trying to make the Cims or shafts removable to facilitate easy gearbox removal?

Also, you may want more than just the two holes in the WCD block to mount the gearbox to the tube. Two more holes higher up on the gearbox would add a lot of strength.

The two lower bolts on the gear box should be able to go through the tubing used on drive rail. You would drill a clearance whole on the outer wall and the correct size on the interior wall.

nathannfm 01-12-2014 15:56

Re: pic: 3 CIM WCD Ball Shifter CAD
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Arpan (Post 1410843)
Have you considered trying to make the Cims or shafts removable to facilitate easy gearbox removal?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryce2471 (Post 1410866)
The Cims are already removable. (although not very easily)

It looks like one CIM mounting bolt on each CIM is blocked by the gears, and that this problem could be solved by slightly rotating the CIMs but this might just be becuase of the angle of the render.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryce2471 (Post 1410875)
I don't see how the top motor is mounted less securely than the top motor of the WCP 3 CIM DS gearbox.

In yours there is much less webbing at the edges of the CIMs. Particularly the top one where there it is best to have webbing near the bottom of said CIM as this will prevent the CIM from sagging. I would recommend adding a web between the top standoffs on the back plate which would cross over the lower face of the top CIM.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:13.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi