View Single Post
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-20-2008, 01:52 PM
s_forbes's Avatar
s_forbes s_forbes is offline
anonymous internet person
FRC #0842 (Falcon Robotics)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,120
s_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: pic: Arm joint idea

A slight typo I made in the first post... it would use t-bolt clamps, not hose clamps (still same concept though). We used a similar method of attaching an arm on our 2007 robot and had no slipping problems due to chain tension. It is worth noting that that was an aluminum/aluminum interface, not a steel/aluminum interface, so the coefficient of friction will be less for this design. I don't think it will be slipping due to chain tension, though. (maybe from torsional loads from a robot pushing sideways on our arm, but that makes the slipping a design feature to prevent broken parts. )

As for the bolt attachment, all of twisting moment is being accounted for by the 2" steel tube. I expect the only force you will see on the indexing bolt will be shear stress, and the sprocket won't see any bending moments either.
Reply With Quote