View Single Post
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 25-10-2013, 07:07
Mr. Lim Mr. Lim is offline
Registered User
AKA: Mr. Lim
no team
Team Role: Leadership
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Rookie Year: 1998
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 1,125
Mr. Lim has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Lim has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Lim has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Lim has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Lim has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Lim has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Lim has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Lim has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Lim has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Lim has a reputation beyond reputeMr. Lim has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBray_T1296 View Post
Not sure how I feel about this one.

I would think the twisting slack the surgical tubing has would be a bad thing?
There is a wood dowel inserted in the surgical tubing the entire length except for the ends that slip over the shafts.

We normally mount the encoder right next to the shaft, so the surgical tube length is very small.

This year we couldn't do this because our CIMs were mounted close together, and we couldn't fit the encoder between them. We borrowed the wood dowel workaround from 188, who had done this a few years prior. I was skeptical at first, but when the guys at 188 said it ended up working great, we went ahead with it too. In our implementation, the encoders are held in place by a floating encoder mount. It uses the cylindrical shape of the CIMs, the fact that the encoders are to big to fit between the CIMs, and the slight tension from the surgical tubing to hold the encoders in place.
__________________
In life, what you give, you keep. What you fail to give, you lose forever...

Last edited by Mr. Lim : 25-10-2013 at 07:56.
Reply With Quote