|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Cim mounting Legal
If you can mount it from the back, you can mount it from the front, so why not just do that?
|
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Cim mounting Legal
we have made a ball shooter that has the motor inside the wheel. So that the end is just sticking out. We have another method to mount to the back however this method packages the best.
|
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Cim mounting Legal
Changing the housing bolts is not the same as changing the mounting bracket.
It could be easily argued that the back housing is not intended to be used as a mounting bracket, and thus does not have the structural strength the front may have (which is intended to be a mounting point). |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Cim mounting Legal
Any side forces on the shaft will be applied at the front end of the motor, by definition. Securing the motor by the front end will allow the mounting system to resist these side forces better than securing the motor by the rear end. Another way of looking at it is that the lever from where the forces are applied on the shaft is very short if the motor is secured at the front. If the motor is secured at the rear, the same force has a much longer lever to cause the body of the motor to deflect. This could result in your pinion gear not meshing. You may get more vibration, especially under load. The higher torque on the two mounting screws at the back could cause the rear plate of the motor or the mounting plate to deform.
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|