pic: ARJ-101 full view

[cad321]

Would the shifter built into the cim shaft not be considered modification of the motor? I suppose you could argue that if you can put a flat on a shaft, machining a few extra holes in it wouldn't be much different.

[roboruler]

Originally Posted by cad321

Would the shifter built into the cim shaft not be considered modification of the motor? I suppose you could argue that if you can put a flat on a shaft, machining a few extra holes in it wouldn't be much different.

R30 A. The mounting brackets and/or output shaft/interface may be modified to facilitate the physical
connection of the motor to the ROBOT and actuated part.

If the output shaft can be cut down to a stub, to inteface with a Versa-planetary, a few holes isn't an issue.

If would be quite interested to see how something like this would hold up under operation, it is a relatively thin shaft, and drilling holes is going to weaken it considerably

[asid61]

Originally Posted by roboruler

If the output shaft can be cut down to a stub, to inteface with a Versa-planetary, a few holes isn't an issue.

If would be quite interested to see how something like this would hold up under operation, it is a relatively thin shaft, and drilling holes is going to weaken it considerably

Basically this whole design was based off R30 A.
I doubt this would hold up as I'm removing most of the material in the CIM shaft, but given that each CIM is only driving one relatively small wheel, it might not be too bad. I didn't bother to do the calculations before because the radial holes for the balls screw up traditional torsion calcs.