Go to Post IT'S LIKE FIRSTmas CAME EARLY THIS YEAR!!! THANKS VEXPro! - akoscielski3 [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 07-06-2016, 17:36
Mr V's Avatar
Mr V Mr V is offline
FIRST Senior Mentor Washington
FRC #5588 (Reign)
Team Role: Coach
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Maple Valley Wa
Posts: 989
Mr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond repute
Re: pic: 2451 PWNAGE Planetary Drive

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnFogarty View Post
Besides weight saving and real-estate gain. Are planetary gearboxes more or less efficient than regular non-planetary gearboxes?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwnageNick View Post
Generally they are less efficient. Due to this being a custom setup, to know what the efficiency of this setup would be a prototype would need to be built to find that out. A prototype would also test any issues with loads, and how stable the wheel would be.
In general a planetary reduction is less efficient than a spur gear reduction. However this set up isn't really a planetary reduction and should have a frictional loss essentially a simple spur gear reduction.

The extra frictional losses occur in a planetary reduction because of the increased number of gear to gear interfaces.

In your basic spur gear reduction you have 1 gear to gear interface per stage. With a planetary set up you have 6 or 8 gear to gear interfaces as well as the friction of the pins that the planets rotate on.

This set up however does not have a sun nor really any planets, it is just the driven gear turned inside out.
__________________
All statements made on Chief Delphi by me are my own opinions and are not official FIRST rulings or opinions and should not be construed as such.




https://www.facebook.com/pages/Team-...77508782410839
Reply With Quote
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-06-2016, 22:51
Cothron Theiss's Avatar
Cothron Theiss Cothron Theiss is offline
Registered User
FRC #4462 (Full Metal Jackets)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Rookie Year: 2013
Location: Kingston, Tennessee
Posts: 446
Cothron Theiss has a brilliant futureCothron Theiss has a brilliant futureCothron Theiss has a brilliant futureCothron Theiss has a brilliant futureCothron Theiss has a brilliant futureCothron Theiss has a brilliant futureCothron Theiss has a brilliant futureCothron Theiss has a brilliant futureCothron Theiss has a brilliant futureCothron Theiss has a brilliant futureCothron Theiss has a brilliant future
Re: pic: 2451 PWNAGE Planetary Drive

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr V View Post
In general a planetary reduction is less efficient than a spur gear reduction. However this set up isn't really a planetary reduction and should have a frictional loss essentially a simple spur gear reduction.

The extra frictional losses occur in a planetary reduction because of the increased number of gear to gear interfaces.
While what you've said is accurate for these purposes in a practical setting, if I understand some of the finer points about involute gear profiles correctly, a ring gear is always slightly less efficient than a regular spur gear. Since the gear teeth of the ring gear are directed inwards, there is an increased amount of interference, which would lead to SLIGHTLY less efficiency if you use the exact same gear teeth profiles and spacing as a regular spur gear reduction.

Now, you can regain this loss in efficiency by increasing the amount of cutout in the ring gear (changing the pressure angle), or decreasing the center distance between the ring gear and pinion gear. But since both of those solutions lead to less load carrying capacity in the gear mesh, it's a trade-off. Since the OP is going with a really interesting combination of the wheel and gearbox, I would NOT risk decreasing the load carrying capacity to regain a small percentage of efficiency.

***Disclaimer***
I may be totally wrong about all of what I just said, but that's what I think is accurate.
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


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 13:41.

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