![]() |
Re: pic: 3 Hour Chassis + 2 Hours
Quote:
80/20 is unneccessary if your team CADs well, because you can plan all of your cuts ahead of time. 80/20 can be nice if your team likes to make it up as you go and constantly be taking off and adding parts. (not that you can't do it with other materials, just 80/20 makes it easy). I would still recommend it for a prototype though. |
Re: pic: 3 Hour Chassis + 2 Hours
Quote:
That 9.87:1 Toughbox seems interesting, but if we're going to buy more Toughboxes, we might as well just make our own (lighter) gearboxes. I just threw the Toughboxes in the CAD in the event that the team wanted to save money and use the Toughboxes we already have. |
Re: pic: 3 Hour Chassis + 2 Hours
Quote:
I'm all for custom gearboxes, but if you want to keep it simple, you have a lot of options. |
Re: pic: 3 Hour Chassis + 2 Hours
Quote:
|
Re: pic: 3 Hour Chassis + 2 Hours
Quote:
For the hollow tube in general, you're right. But for the specific hollow tube called for, 80/20 will be heavier. Comment on the cross-braces: I'm not quite sure I'd trust a 1/16" wall for that application in that pattern. Change the pattern, and you'll probably be fine--but run the analysis just to make sure. |
Re: pic: 3 Hour Chassis + 2 Hours
Quote:
(These numbers are what SolidWorks is telling me). You can pocket 1x1 tubing, but you can't pocket 80/20 so that could be included in the weight tradeoff. |
Re: pic: 3 Hour Chassis + 2 Hours
Quote:
|
Re: pic: 3 Hour Chassis + 2 Hours
i would recommend the use of C channel instead of square pipe, it can be just as strong if oriented correctly, and it is lighter as well as easier to attached.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 14:00. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi