View Single Post
  #8   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-03-2011, 22:36
dtengineering's Avatar
dtengineering dtengineering is offline
Teaching Teachers to Teach Tech
AKA: Jason Brett
no team (British Columbia FRC teams)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,829
dtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Take the "Bane" out of your Banebot P60s - Solution to Banebot P60 Weaknesses

Those look like some great upgrades to a BB P60. You may well be able to get more torque out of the gearbox after the modifications than before, however it is important to remember that the purpose of the very high gear reductions is to reduce speed, not to increase torque. Note the following comment prominently displayed on BaneBot's product page for their high-reduction P60s...

"Maximum torque recommendation
We recommend maximum torque not exceed 35 ft-lb for all P60 Series Gearboxes. It is possible to mount motors that will exceed this in higher gear reductions. Higher reduction gearboxes should be utilized primarily for speed reduction. Designs utilizing a P60 gearbox / motor combination that will exceed 35 ft-lb should include a method of limiting torque to prevent damage to the gearbox."

As for the "safety factor" being at or near one, I always felt that as a robot designer that safety factor calculations were my job. If the manufacturer says "don't exceed 35 ft-lb", then it was my job to ensure that I didn't. If I needed a safety factor to make sure that I didn't, then that was my job to engineer it in. Sometimes, when pushing a machine to the limit, with no risk of injury to people or property, it made sense to design a system with a very low "safety factor".... but no matter what, I always knew that when you run equipment at the extremes of its design limits that it will sometimes break.

Looks like rather than dialling back the demands, you're cranking up the specs. It looks great and I hope it works well!

Jason
Reply With Quote