View Single Post
  #41   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 15-06-2014, 19:19
Rauhul Varma Rauhul Varma is offline
Drivetrain and Design Lead
FRC #0192 (GRT)
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: Palo Alto
Posts: 49
Rauhul Varma has much to be proud ofRauhul Varma has much to be proud ofRauhul Varma has much to be proud ofRauhul Varma has much to be proud ofRauhul Varma has much to be proud ofRauhul Varma has much to be proud ofRauhul Varma has much to be proud ofRauhul Varma has much to be proud ofRauhul Varma has much to be proud of
Re: pic: Team 192's 2014 Gearbox

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris is me View Post
This is something my team has gone back and forth on as well. Our first belt drive had several failures and was done with 9mm HTD. We changed some things including the pulley size and went to 15mm* GT2 for a few years. This year we used 15mm HTD in order to get parts faster and we had no problems. The only reason we don't go GT2 is that pulleys and belts tend to be less available with longer lead times than HTD. For something like a gearbox like this I would absolutely go with the stronger tooth profile.

*(At this point I'm pretty sure that for the end of a driveline 15mm is a lot safer than 9mm for 4" wheels and pulleys in the 24T range, regardless of tooth profile. If the difference in tooth profile is your factor of safety between failure and success, maybe try going a bit wider.)
I absolutely agree. We run 15mm wide 5mm pitch GT2 belts in our WCD with an exact C-C just so we never have to worry about belt failure nor tension.

I have experienced long lead times for GT2 profile components, but since we order them super early in the season its a non issue.
Reply With Quote