View Single Post
  #15   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 25-05-2016, 12:33
scottandme's Avatar
scottandme scottandme is offline
Registered User
AKA: Scott Meredith
FRC #5895 (Peddie School Robotics)
Team Role: Teacher
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Hightstown, NJ
Posts: 239
scottandme has a reputation beyond reputescottandme has a reputation beyond reputescottandme has a reputation beyond reputescottandme has a reputation beyond reputescottandme has a reputation beyond reputescottandme has a reputation beyond reputescottandme has a reputation beyond reputescottandme has a reputation beyond reputescottandme has a reputation beyond reputescottandme has a reputation beyond reputescottandme has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Integrating Encoder Into Gearbox

Quote:
Originally Posted by InFlight View Post
If you measured the current runout of your own lathe you might be surprised. Most will be over the 0.006 value which was my point.

If your drilled off center; your applying a bending load into the resolver shaft every rotation with direct mounting. At 100 rpm your going to be challenging a floating mount, and getting higher loads in the resolver bearings.

This is the reason many of us prefer alternate non-direct mounting. For close mounting a no contact magnetic rotation sensor would make far more sense.
Assuming you're talking about tailstock alignment now? This is one of those "fixing the wrong problem" situations. Just align your tailstock, it's really not that hard. Alternately, get a tiny boring bar and solve the problem in a different way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinSchuh View Post
To add to that, we like lexan/plastic because you avoid putting much stress on the encoder.
Sounds like it works perfectly well for 971. I've always used helical beam couplers, or through bore encoders, no issue with either.
__________________
Team 2590 Mentor [2009-2014]
Team 5895 Mentor [2016-Present]
Reply With Quote