Go to Post Winning a match is not something a robot does, winning is a team effort that requires the cooperation of dozens of individuals. - Andrew Schreiber [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > ChiefDelphi.com Website > Extra Discussion
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 19-08-2007, 21:46
lukevanoort lukevanoort is offline
in between teams
AKA: Luke Van Oort
no team
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Waterloo, ON, Canada
Posts: 1,873
lukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond reputelukevanoort has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to lukevanoort
Re: pic: 114 New Gearbox Design

Quote:
Originally Posted by 114ManualLabor View Post
From my basic knowledge, wouldn't the higher torque at lower speeds mean that my gearbox will end up smaller, less weight
I'd be surprised if the weight difference would be that major, and it might even go in the other direction. Since the big chip weighs ~2lbs more than the little one, and you're using aluminum gears/shafts it would seem to me that the weight of another gear reduction or just a larger reduction on the first and/or second reductions isn't that different than the weight difference of the motors.

EDIT: I plugged the numbers into JVN's spreadsheet, and I got the following for the big chip @ 40 A puts out 276W, and the lil chip 275.7W so the difference is barely noticeable. And, yes, I realized the big chip is putting out more power than the peak power rating FIRST supplies, so I ran a quick power calc on the FIRST supplied NLS and stall torque numbers and came up with 285W being the max power of the big cim. So, something is amiss in either FIRSTs numbers or my calcs. I suspect FIRST's numbers are the culprit because using the same calc I got the right peak power for the lil chip.
__________________
Team 1219: 2009 - Mentor
Team 587: 2005 - Animator, 2006-2008 - Team Captain

Last edited by lukevanoort : 19-08-2007 at 23:33.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
pic: 114 2 speed Gearbox CraigHickman Technical Discussion 13 25-02-2007 19:41
pic: 114 Gearbox CAD CraigHickman Extra Discussion 7 26-01-2007 23:37
pic: 1881 new gearbox design GMAdan Extra Discussion 7 21-12-2006 01:59
pic: 114 drive module design CraigHickman Extra Discussion 3 06-12-2006 21:59
pic: 114 gearbox design CraigHickman Extra Discussion 4 05-12-2006 19:53


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 23:07.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi