Gearboxes? Help!

[Pauline Tasci]

Hi! I'm Pauline from 589 Falkon Robotics. Since our inception in 2001 we have been using the AndyMark toughboxes a lot! I believe one year we created our own custom gearboxes and it went great, but that was over 5 years ago.
I am the head of the whole drive system team and really want to either build our own gearboxes or use better ones than the andymark tough boxes.

Don't get me wrong the Andymark toughboxes are awesome! Though we have been using our robot more and more every off season and the andymark ones are simply not holding up.

Any suggestions? Anything would help! Thank you!

[AdamHeard]

Can you describe the failure you are experiencing. Pictures are a great supplement as well.

We make custom gearboxes for almost every system, and most are nearly identical in AndyMark in terms of what would wear out or fail.

If you're experiencing failure it's likely lack of grease, foreign debris causing issues, misalignment causing gears to clash, etc...

[bardd]

Are you asking for alternative gearboxes or an explanation on custom gearboxes?

If you're looking for alternatives, I would highly recommend CIMple-box, the ones that were in the KOP in the last two years. They're really sturdy, and even though they have only 1/3 of the toughbox's reduction, we got great speeds and intense pushing power with them.

If you're thinking of custom, I can't help unfortunately

[Pauline Tasci]

cimple boxes? I actually have built a few for testing code in the beginning of season? how many of them did u use on the drive system? one on each side?

[bardd]

Originally Posted by pauline589

cimple boxes? I actually have built a few for testing code in the beginning of season? how many of them did u use on the drive system? one on each side?

Yes, and the same last year. In 2011 each powered three wheels, in 2012 four.
In fact, we were using the ones from 2011 since we got them until about a month ago (we're on a break), and they still work great. we used them on average about once a week for a few hours.
Again, highly recommended

Originally Posted by bardd

Yes, and the same last year. In 2011 each powered three wheels, in 2012 four.
In fact, we were using the ones from 2011 since we got them until about a month ago (we're on a break), and they still work great. we used them on average about once a week for a few hours.
Again, highly recommended

I second this. I've looked through multiple gearboxes for use on our robots, and through all of them, the CIMple Box is by far one of the best. Very reliable, easy to mount, and saves teams a lot of money/time when designing a robot (no need to order different gearboxes, these come in the kit of parts!). 1 per side, and your drivetrain will be trucking all year long.

There's a reason that 1114 used CIMple Boxes in their Kitbot on Steroids. They're amazing.

[Pauline Tasci]

Originally Posted by SuperNerd256

I second this. I've looked through multiple gearboxes for use on our robots, and through all of them, the CIMple Box is by far one of the best. Very reliable, easy to mount, and saves teams a lot of money/time when designing a robot (no need to order different gearboxes, these come in the kit of parts!). 1 per side, and your drivetrain will be trucking all year long.

There's a reason that 1114 used CIMple Boxes in their Kitbot on Steroids. They're amazing.

One per side? Hmm.. I guess I can try it during off season. What is different about it that makes it so reliable?

Originally Posted by pauline589

One per side? Hmm.. I guess I can try it during off season. What is different about it that makes it so reliable?

Like the name suggests, it's very simple (3 gears, 2 of which are on the CIM motors), only 1 stage, so it's more efficient, and because of its simplicity, there are little to no possible failure points.

Just BE SURE TO GREASE THEM. (Caps and bold for emphasis)

[Pauline Tasci]

Originally Posted by SuperNerd256

Like the name suggests, it's very simple (3 gears, 2 of which are on the CIM motors), only 1 stage, so it's more efficient, and because of its simplicity, there are little to no possible failure points.

Just BE SURE TO GREASE THEM. (Caps and bold for emphasis)

hmmm okay! I'll for sure try it!

[bardd]

Originally Posted by SuperNerd256

Like the name suggests, it's very simple (3 gears, 2 of which are on the CIM motors), only 1 stage, so it's more efficient, and because of its simplicity, there are little to no possible failure points.

Just BE SURE TO GREASE THEM. (Caps and bold for emphasis)

^That,
and I also think it has something to do with the fact CIMple-boxes are made mostly of plastic (which is ofcourse softer than aluminium), so gears lose less energy and are damaged less if (and they do) they scrape against the casing.

edit: This is wrong (except for agreeing with SuperNerd256).
For explenation (or excuse): http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...7&postcount=30

[davidthefat]

Originally Posted by bardd

^That,
and I also think it has something to do with the fact CIMple-boxes are made mostly of plastic (which is ofcourse softer than aluminium), so gears lose less energy and are damaged less if (and they do) they scrape against the casing.

We used the toughbox mini; which is essentially the toughbox's internals and a plastic casing.

[John]

Originally Posted by davidthefat

We used the toughbox mini; which is essentially the toughbox's internals and a plastic casing.

The gearbox in the pictures (look at #15) is a toughbox mini

This is an original toughbox

I don't know much about the mini, but I do know the only toughbox we have on a competition robot has ran in about 50 matches, and in every demo we have had for the last 3 1/2 years, without any problems.

Also, looking at image #11, from the wear pattern on the gear it appears that only part of the gear (the bottom half) meshed with the other gear (the top has no wear). This may be how the gearbox is designed (I don't know, I haven't looked at one closely enough, but it may be an indication that the gears are not quite the right location. Maybe missing a spacer/spacer in wrong place). I would expect this to make it wear faster, maybe someone who knows more about this than me can answer that?

[R.C.]

Originally Posted by bardd

^That,
and I also think it has something to do with the fact CIMple-boxes are made mostly of plastic (which is ofcourse softer than aluminium), so gears lose less energy and are damaged less if (and they do) they scrape against the casing.

I fail to understand how that makes the cimple-box more efficient than a normal aluminum gearbox (al plates). If anything it should be less efficient than a correctly made/assembled gearbox regardless of plates.

Gears should never scrape against the plates. On a cimple box, the gear has a double protrusion, so it should never scrape against the gearbox.

-RC

[John]

Originally Posted by R.C.

If anything it should be less efficient than a correctly made/assembled gearbox regardless of plates.

This should be true. With all the parts that go into the gearbox, usually there are several ways to "make it work" that allow the motor to spin the output shaft, but only one is correct (and will make it keep working).

[bardd]

Originally Posted by R.C.

I fail to understand how that makes the cimple-box more efficient than a normal aluminum gearbox (al plates). If anything it should be less efficient than a correctly made/assembled gearbox regardless of plates.

Gears should never scrape against the plates. On a cimple box, the gear has a double protrusion, so it should never scrape against the gearbox.

-RC

You're right, and I apollogize. I wrote this thinking about one specific gearbox we didn't assemble correctly. I messed around with it alot lately and as a result I thought about it when posting.

I promise not to post at 4am again.