View Single Post
  #16   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-06-2016, 13:17
Chris is me's Avatar
Chris is me Chris is me is offline
no bag, vex only, final destination
AKA: Pinecone
FRC #0228 (GUS Robotics); FRC #2170 (Titanium Tomahawks)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Glastonbury, CT
Posts: 7,684
Chris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Chris is me
Re: pic: Another Belt-In-Tube Drivetrain

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ty Tremblay View Post
Sorry about that. I had realized that my belt model wasn't thick enough so I changed it and then realized that I had about .003" of space between the belt and the "roof" of the tube. I found 23T GT3 pulley stock on SDP/SI and decided to make that change since it gives me enough roof clearance (.043") and still gives me room for the bearing counterbore.
You have nothing to worry about with flangeless pulleys. 2791 has never had flanges on the pulleys and has never had a problem at all. This is one of the benefits of belt-in-tube.

As for GT vs HTD belts - the biggest thing to keep in mind is availability of particular belt lengths. Sourcing GT2 and GT3 belts can be difficult, but it is extremely easy to get HTD belting. I have heard that the HTD's deeper tooth profile is supposed to be better for reversing loads / ratcheting prevention as well, but I have no data to back this up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuclearnerd View Post
I'm also concerned about not having rotating flanges on at least the center pulley. My old team used the Vex belt upgrade on the AM14U chassis in 2014. It worked for the season, but the belts showed some pretty hairy wear, as the sides of the two belts rubbed past each other on the common, center pulley.
If belts are properly aligned and tensioned, this just shouldn't happen. When the belts are on the pulley, they aren't moving relative to each other at all. I've never run into significant problems with a setup like this.
__________________
Mentor / Drive Coach: 228 (2016-?)
...2016 Waterbury SFs (with 3314, 3719), RIDE #2 Seed / Winners (with 1058, 6153), Carver QFs (with 503, 359, 4607)
Mentor / Consultant Person: 2170 (2017-?)
---
College Mentor: 2791 (2010-2015)
...2015 TVR Motorola Quality, FLR GM Industrial Design
...2014 FLR Motorola Quality / SFs (with 341, 4930)
...2013 BAE Motorola Quality, WPI Regional #1 Seed / Delphi Excellence in Engineering / Finalists (with 20, 3182)
...2012 BAE Imagery / Finalists (with 1519, 885), CT Xerox Creativity / SFs (with 2168, 118)
Student: 1714 (2009) - 2009 Minnesota 10,000 Lakes Regional Winners (with 2826, 2470)
2791 Build Season Photo Gallery - Look here for mechanism photos My Robotics Blog (Updated April 11 2014)
Reply With Quote