View Single Post
  #11   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 26-10-2016, 13:41
asid61's Avatar
asid61 asid61 is offline
Registered User
AKA: Anand Rajamani
FRC #0115 (MVRT)
Team Role: Mechanical
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Rookie Year: 2013
Location: Cupertino, CA
Posts: 2,217
asid61 has a reputation beyond reputeasid61 has a reputation beyond reputeasid61 has a reputation beyond reputeasid61 has a reputation beyond reputeasid61 has a reputation beyond reputeasid61 has a reputation beyond reputeasid61 has a reputation beyond reputeasid61 has a reputation beyond reputeasid61 has a reputation beyond reputeasid61 has a reputation beyond reputeasid61 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: pic: CGX-115, cam-counterweighted cycloidal drive

So apparently the radial loads on the camshaft (which is attached to the CIM shaft in this case) is equal to Torque/(eccentricity * gear ratio), which assuming you want to have a 200ft-lb (2400 lb-in) torque on this maximum comes out to
2400/(0.05*900)
or about 53 pounds of pure radial force on the CIM. A CIM at stall on a 12t pinion experiences about 22lbs of pure radial force. At the moment I have a pair of 8mm bearings in the output shaft, so it's probably safe, although on smaller gearboxes like the Versaplanetary version where this is not the case there could be savage failure modes. This is mainly a problem for cam-counterweighted cycloidal drives, as they don't have 2 wobble gears on 180* phase offsets to cancel out the forces.
__________________
<Now accepting CAD requests and commissions>

Reply With Quote