Quote:
Originally Posted by ajlapp
|
I agree that non-backdrivable cycloids are more inefficient. The efficiency is related to the friction the angle of contact between the the teeth, and I think the offset as well, and the static coefficient of friction between the ring teeth and wobble gear teeth is what causes the ability to non-backdrive while lowering the efficiency. IIRC cycloidal drives with static teeth are extremely unlikely to backdrive at the cost of reduced efficiency, while ball-bearing ring teeth allow it to have just enough efficiency to be backdrivable, albeit not without lots of friction.
As a side note, that is a beautiful cycloid box! What kind of efficiency did you get out of it in the end?