pic: 3 Motor Single Speed Gearbox

[Chris is me]

loading photo ...

[sdcantrell56]

You can definitely use the CIM mounting holes as the transmission stand offs. This design overall looks good. You could look into using delrin plates instead of aluminum to drop a bunch of weight for the same amount of machining. Also think about how you are going to mount the transmission as right now there are no mounting holes.

[sanddrag]

I would not recommend Delrin plates. Holding tolerance is more difficult, and they flex, causing gear wear issues.

Originally Posted by sanddrag

I would not recommend Delrin plates. Holding tolerance is more difficult, and they flex, causing gear wear issues.

We did a gearbox with delrin plates, and the gears wore about twice as quickly as our aluminum boxes.

Also, assembling the box with the motor bolts is quite doable, but makes assembling a bit of a hand gymnastics exercise.

Edit: A bit of a suggestion: If you can recess the standoffs to allow the box to 'snap' together, it makes assembly much easier, and makes aligning parts much quicker.

[Brandon Holley]

Looks really nice thus far. You may want to search cd-media for our 2008 drivetrain. I designed it to be a 6 motor (4 CIM, 2FP) single speed drive system with 4.75" wheels. Just something comparable to look at.

If I am interpreting your question correctly you were asking about clearance inside the gearbox. Be sure you give yourself some clearance for tolerance stack up. If you don't, when you tighten everything up your gearbox could be seized up, or you may even damage your bearings.

The motor screws are completely legit to use as a method to hold the gearbox together.

Keep up the good work.

-Brando

[Lil' Lavery]

Why not use a 1/8" plate instead of a 1/4" plate?

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Why not use a 1/8" plate instead of a 1/4" plate?

One advantage of 1/4" plate here is it lets you put the CIMs real close to each other without the bearing popping through and hitting them.

[NickE]

If you're gonna mill the plates, you're gonna need some exterior fillets. If you're gonna jet them, you're probably fine, but I still like having the fillets there for cosmetic reasons.

Originally Posted by CraigHickman

A bit of a suggestion: If you can recess the standoffs to allow the box to 'snap' together, it makes assembly much easier, and makes aligning parts much quicker.

Having counterbores for the standoffs certainly keeps everything more ridgid, but i would say makes assembly much more difficult. Lining up every standoff with its corresponding hole can be quite a challenge (which would probably become even harder with these being the motor mount screws). If you're gonna include counterbores for the standoffs, do not do it on all six standoffs. Even with just four counterbored standoffs on our gearboxes this year, it was still quite a challenge to line them all up.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

One advantage of 1/4" plate here is it lets you put the CIMs real close to each other without the bearing popping through and hitting them.

That's pretty much the only reason, and I wanted two identical plates. You can't put 3 CIMs on the gearbox with this ratio without overlapping the bearings.

[Collin Fultz]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

That's pretty much the only reason, and I wanted two identical plates. You can't put 3 CIMs on the gearbox with this ratio without overlapping the bearings.

The Team221 WildSwerve modules use a 1/8" bearing shim so that 1/8" plates can be used. They work pretty well. I'll see if i can find a picture.

Also, I wouldn't use the motor mounting holes as the gearbox plate holes, mainly because I like those motor mounts TIGHT and sometimes gearbox assembly bolts need to be loosened a little bit so the gearbox can run with less internal friction. I suppose that may be a personal bias though and not a requirement.

One other thing to think about: How would this mount onto the frame of a robot? The machined plates look cool, but how would you mount it? That's probably too much of a robot-specific question to fully answer right now but is worth thinking about.

Looks good. Keep up the hard work.

[Tom Line]

Since you have 2 stages there Chris, I'd evaluate the gears you have available and try to shoot for center distances between the second gear stage shafts that will allow you to swap out for a couple different gear sets. Much like the final stage on the super-shifters allows you to modify the gearing by swapping 2 gears. This is FAR easier than changing the spur gears on the 3 motor outputs, and will allow you to modify easily should you ever want to drop a FP or CIM and need a slightly different torque.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by Tom Line

Since you have 2 stages there Chris, I'd evaluate the gears you have available and try to shoot for center distances between the second gear stage shafts that will allow you to swap out for a couple different gear sets. Much like the final stage on the super-shifters allows you to modify the gearing by swapping 2 gears. This is FAR easier than changing the spur gears on the 3 motor outputs, and will allow you to modify easily should you ever want to drop a FP or CIM and need a slightly different torque.

Right now the distances between gears would accommodate a standard Toughbox ratio, but the placement of the motor / spacers interferes. The use of a standard ratio was far from intentional though.

[artdutra04]

Originally Posted by Collin Fultz

The Team221 WildSwerve modules use a 1/8" bearing shim so that 1/8" plates can be used. They work pretty well. I'll see if i can find a picture.

We've also used 1/8" shims with 1/8" sheet metal plates in our gearboxes for the past two seasons. We use a single #8-32 button head screw and PEM nut to hold them in place. Here's a photo: