I know that it's often dangerous to use common sense in a YMTC thread... - Kris Verdeyen [more]
 Chief Delphi Chain Tensioning
 CD-Media CD-Spy
 portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

#1
06-23-2013, 03:50 PM
 Cash4587 Registered User AKA: Cooper Cash FRC #4587 (Jersey Voltage) Team Role: Mentor Join Date: Mar 2013 Rookie Year: 2013 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 527
Chain Tensioning

Okay, I have been trying to use 1114's method of not using chain tensioners. In their "Drivetrain Design" presentation it states if you use the biggest sprockets possible that you do not need to tension the chains IF the distance between the the centers of the two wheels is a multiple of the chain pitch. BUT, I have gone online and used some chain distance calculators (http://www.botlanta.org/converters/d.../sprocket.html and http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/chainlength.html) and when I put in a multiple of .375 for a center to center distance, it does not come up with an even number of chain links as 1114's presentation stated. Is this correct? Should I use what the calculators are giving me or what 1114 stated in their presentation? I emailed Karthik already and he forwarded the message to their design lead and I haven't got a response yet. I am very confused on which center to center distance to use. The calculators or 1114's concept of multiples of .375. Well If anyone can help, Thanks in advance!
__________________
Team 4587: Jersey Voltage - Lead Technical Mentor, Drive Coach
#2
06-23-2013, 04:16 PM
 DonRotolo Broke a hundred! FRC #0832 Team Role: Mentor Join Date: Jan 2005 Rookie Year: 2005 Location: Atlanta GA Posts: 7,366
Re: Chain Tensioning

OK, let's imagine we have a chain that has a pitch of 0.375 inch. That means each link is .375 apart, as are teeth on a sprocket...but there are even and odd links (or 'innie' and 'outie' links). So really, a full "link" is 0.750. Get that?

So let's say you want an Integer (whole, not fractional) number of links. If we have a sufficiently large sprocket, we can say that:

1. The number of links on 1/2 of the sprocket is an integer (one lnk per tooth, right?)
2. If we imagine a point at the very top of the sprocket, it should coincide with the center of the sprocket. So for any chain going from top to top of two sprockets, if the centers are an Integer number of links apart, there must be an Integer number of links between the tops. And the bottoms.
3. If we have an integer for the sprocket half and an integer between the tops and bottoms, that all adds up to an Integer. See it?

I went to the first calculator and used 2 sprockets of 40 teeth each and a center distance of 37.5 inches. Using the above, I would expect 2 * 20 links on the sprockets and 100 links top and bottom, a total of 240 links...and that is what the calculator says it is. So the calculator seems to be working for me....
__________________

I am N2IRZ - What's your callsign?
*All comments are mine and do not reprsent my place of employment*

Last edited by DonRotolo : 06-23-2013 at 04:19 PM.
#3
06-23-2013, 04:19 PM
 Nemo Team 967 Mentor AKA: Dan Niemitalo FRC #0967 (Iron Lions) Team Role: Coach Join Date: Nov 2009 Rookie Year: 2009 Location: Iowa Posts: 863
Re: Chain Tensioning

In addition to what DonRotolo said, the guideline you're referring to doesn't work unless the two sprockets have the same number of teeth, like in a wheel to wheel connection. Are you looking at a chain that goes from a smaller sprocket on a gearbox to a larger sprocket on a wheel? If so, you can still use your center distance calculator to figure out a suitable center distance that gives a chain length that is a multiple of 0.750".

Last edited by Nemo : 06-23-2013 at 04:22 PM. Reason: worded incorrectly
#4
06-23-2013, 04:55 PM
 Cash4587 Registered User AKA: Cooper Cash FRC #4587 (Jersey Voltage) Team Role: Mentor Join Date: Mar 2013 Rookie Year: 2013 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 527
Re: Chain Tensioning

Quote:
Oh okay so it works for same sprocket size. I was looking at from gearbox (15t) to wheel (32t).
I get what you mean though. So if I were to use the .750 for "pitch" in the calculator the number of links needed would be accurate If I am using #35 chain if I am trying to not use tensioners?
__________________
Team 4587: Jersey Voltage - Lead Technical Mentor, Drive Coach
#5
06-23-2013, 04:59 PM
 Cash4587 Registered User AKA: Cooper Cash FRC #4587 (Jersey Voltage) Team Role: Mentor Join Date: Mar 2013 Rookie Year: 2013 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 527
Re: Chain Tensioning

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Nemo In addition to what DonRotolo said, the guideline you're referring to doesn't work unless the two sprockets have the same number of teeth, like in a wheel to wheel connection. Are you looking at a chain that goes from a smaller sprocket on a gearbox to a larger sprocket on a wheel? If so, you can still use your center distance calculator to figure out a suitable center distance that gives a chain length that is a multiple of 0.750".
Yes I am trying to figure out how not to use tensioners at all on the robot so I will need to figure out the correct center to center Distances for gearbox to wheel, gearbox to wheel and also wheel to wheel. I am just confused on the whole concept really. It was only a couple bullet points in 1114's presentation.
__________________
Team 4587: Jersey Voltage - Lead Technical Mentor, Drive Coach
#6
06-23-2013, 05:19 PM
 apples000 Registered User no team Join Date: Mar 2012 Rookie Year: 2012 Location: United States Posts: 222
Re: Chain Tensioning

We don't tension chains either. We use the center to center calculator in inventor to give us a starting point, then as the chains stretch, we put spacers underneath our gearbox to tighten the chains. We played > 35 matches this year on the competition bot, and we never had to adjust, but after a weekend of driver practice, it helps to put some spacers under the gearbox. Try to keep the chain runs as short as possible.
#7
06-23-2013, 05:28 PM
 Cash4587 Registered User AKA: Cooper Cash FRC #4587 (Jersey Voltage) Team Role: Mentor Join Date: Mar 2013 Rookie Year: 2013 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 527
Re: Chain Tensioning

Quote:
 Originally Posted by apples000 We don't tension chains either. We use the center to center calculator in inventor to give us a starting point, then as the chains stretch, we put spacers underneath our gearbox to tighten the chains. We played > 35 matches this year on the competition bot, and we never had to adjust, but after a weekend of driver practice, it helps to put some spacers under the gearbox. Try to keep the chain runs as short as possible.
Oh okay, Do you have any suggestions on how to do this concept well?
__________________
Team 4587: Jersey Voltage - Lead Technical Mentor, Drive Coach
#8
06-23-2013, 06:59 PM
 Pault Registered User FRC #0246 (Overclocked) Team Role: College Student Join Date: Jan 2013 Rookie Year: 2012 Location: Boston Posts: 618
Re: Chain Tensioning

Here is a tool from Dr. Joe that you could use. We used it for our arm actuators* and did not experience any problems**. The interface is not beginner friendly though, and unless you figure how to use the goal seek feature in excel, you will be playing a game of guess and check to get a good distance.

Alternatively, you can use this tool from Paul Copioli. It is much more user friendly, but isn't as powerful as Dr. Joe's tool. Also, the only person who has confirmed it actually works (as far as I know) is Paul Copioli himself, but I personally would be inclined to trust him.

Or, if you are too macho for these wimpy excel sheets, Paul Copioli provides the actual formula he uses in the his calculator:
Quote:
 # of Links = 2*CD+ N/2 +n/2 + [(N-n) / (2*PI)]2 / CD = 62.563 Round to nearest # of even links  L = 62 links Recalculate CD in inches using following formula: Pitch/8*{2*L – N – n + SQRT[(2*L – N – n )2 - 0.81*(N - n)2]} CD = 4.429” … but we are not done. Add 0.012” for #35 Chain Add 0.018” for #25 Chain  CD = 4.447”
Source: http://www.fightingpi.org/Resources/...oli%20MSC.pptx

Not so macho now, huh .

*given that the c-c distance was only ~4in and we were using it at 8:00PM on bag and tag day, so we weren't that picky.

** except for that 1 time where a bolt head got into the path of the chain and the master link eventually snapped, but I doubt that this was a problem with our c-c distance.
#9
06-23-2013, 08:39 PM
 DonRotolo Broke a hundred! FRC #0832 Team Role: Mentor Join Date: Jan 2005 Rookie Year: 2005 Location: Atlanta GA Posts: 7,366
Re: Chain Tensioning

OK, 15t and 32t, no problem.

If we assume a "long" chain, the wrap on each sprocket is about 50%, and the formula still works.

Let's assume a 'short' chain though, c-c around 4" maybe?

15t gets 7 links, not 7.5, because it doesn't wrap all the way around. YOU can calculate the exact number. If you don't know the geometry, try doing it graphically - draw it to scale on paper.

32t gets just a hair more than 16, call it 17.

7+17=24, a nice even number.

If we pick a distance as a multiple of 3.75, it would almost be perfect, except the chain is at a slight angle, so the chain needs to be a hair longer...or the c-c needs to be a bit shorter... than normal c-c. So if I pick 3.75", I'd go with 3.7 and accept a little looseness or 3.65 and struggle installing the chain.

Again, YOU can do the math to figure exactly how much longer 10 links will be at an angle of (need to figure that too...)

The whole point is, if you can do the math, it's just geometry and trigonmetry. If you can't, or need help, draw it out to scale on paper. (a 15t sprocket can be depicted with a (15*.375)/Pi diameter circle). Measure the angles or calculate them, both are perfectly acceptable methods. And, in your head, know the answer will be just a bit short of (N*.375), so if your method gives such a result, you can know you are spot on.
__________________

I am N2IRZ - What's your callsign?
*All comments are mine and do not reprsent my place of employment*
#10
07-01-2013, 09:07 AM
 Siri Dare greatly AKA: 1640 coach 2010-2014 FRC #2641 (PCCR; Refs & RIs) Team Role: Coach Join Date: Jan 2008 Rookie Year: 2007 Location: PA Posts: 1,725
Re: Chain Tensioning

Team 1640 uses this calculator by our head mentor, which automatically finds the actual correct wrap around each sprocket (or pulley), and finds the closest correct (integer link) distance for any given input. Just put in your 2 tooth counts and a ballpark of what you want the C-C distance to be, and it'll spit back the true answer.

It's been great for us, though being swerve drive we don't use long chain runs very often. We've never had a C-C chain issue on our swerve modules in 4 years, and we've just shy of 90 matches this year to date. It also works perfectly for timing belts, which we have used over long distances.
__________________
#11
08-20-2014, 05:40 PM
 Michael Hill Registered User FRC #3138 (Innovators Robotics) Team Role: Mentor Join Date: Jul 2004 Rookie Year: 2003 Location: Dayton, OH Posts: 1,882
Re: Chain Tensioning

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Pault Here is a tool from Dr. Joe that you could use. We used it for our arm actuators* and did not experience any problems**. The interface is not beginner friendly though, and unless you figure how to use the goal seek feature in excel, you will be playing a game of guess and check to get a good distance. Alternatively, you can use this tool from Paul Copioli. It is much more user friendly, but isn't as powerful as Dr. Joe's tool. Also, the only person who has confirmed it actually works (as far as I know) is Paul Copioli himself, but I personally would be inclined to trust him. Or, if you are too macho for these wimpy excel sheets, Paul Copioli provides the actual formula he uses in the his calculator: Source: http://www.fightingpi.org/Resources/...oli%20MSC.pptx Not so macho now, huh . *given that the c-c distance was only ~4in and we were using it at 8:00PM on bag and tag day, so we weren't that picky. ** except for that 1 time where a bolt head got into the path of the chain and the master link eventually snapped, but I doubt that this was a problem with our c-c distance.
So Paul suggests spacing out sprockets farther apart than exact C-C? Doesn't that really increase the bearing load?
#12
08-21-2014, 11:21 AM
 AdamHeard Lead Mentor FRC #0973 (Greybots) Team Role: Mentor Join Date: Oct 2004 Rookie Year: 2004 Location: Atascadero Posts: 6,102
Re: Chain Tensioning

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Michael Hill So Paul suggests spacing out sprockets farther apart than exact C-C? Doesn't that really increase the bearing load?
Not knowing the context in which he said that, I would assume at least part of this is to take up mechanical slop in the average team's system.

If you go exact c-c, you're actually going to be under that number by whatever slop exist in all the holes and shafts in the system.
__________________
Please take the GreyT Products survey here!
2x1 and 2x2 1/16" wall tubing for sale!

Need help? Check out 973 Remote Assistance and Mentorship Program.

2017 "World Champions"
2014 Galileo Champions
2011 World Champions
#13
08-21-2014, 11:50 AM
 Jared Registered User no team Team Role: Programmer Join Date: Aug 2013 Rookie Year: 2012 Location: Connecticut Posts: 607
Re: Chain Tensioning

Quote:
 Originally Posted by AdamHeard Not knowing the context in which he said that, I would assume at least part of this is to take up mechanical slop in the average team's system. If you go exact c-c, you're actually going to be under that number by whatever slop exist in all the holes and shafts in the system.
In his spreadsheet calculator, he recommends adding .018" for #35 chain and .012" for #25 chain.

From my experience, the actual calculated C-C distances are exactly where you want the chain to be, but due to slop between the bearing and the frame, the hex shaft and the bearing, and the hex shaft and the hex bore in the sprocket, you can have a decent amount of slop that reduces the effective C-C distance.
#14
08-21-2014, 12:06 PM
 Oblarg Registered User AKA: Eli Barnett FRC #0449 (The Blair Robot Project) Team Role: Mentor Join Date: Mar 2009 Rookie Year: 2008 Location: Philadelphia, PA Posts: 1,892
Re: Chain Tensioning

You could always consider using belts. Much less headache that way, and they're more efficient/make less noise, to boot!
__________________
"Mmmmm, chain grease and aluminum shavings..."
"The breakfast of champions!"

Member, FRC Team 449: 2007-2010
Drive Mechanics Lead, FRC Team 449: 2009-2010
Alumnus/Technical Mentor, FRC Team 449: 2010-Present
Lead Technical Mentor, FRC Team 4464: 2012-2015
Technical Mentor, FRC Team 5830: 2015-2016

FRC Drivetrain Characterization
#15
08-21-2014, 12:18 PM
 Michael Hill Registered User FRC #3138 (Innovators Robotics) Team Role: Mentor Join Date: Jul 2004 Rookie Year: 2003 Location: Dayton, OH Posts: 1,882
Re: Chain Tensioning

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Oblarg You could always consider using belts. Much less headache that way, and they're more efficient/make less noise, to boot!
My only real issue with belts is that they're thick. They take up a lot of valuable horizontal space on the robot that can be used for mounting electronics and such. Also, Vex doesn't (at least yet) have GT2 profiles for VersaPulleys (I'm absolutely addicted to the VersaHub). We could probably get them manufactured, but I'd rather use our machining resources for other stuff.

 Thread Tools Display Modes Rate This Thread Linear Mode Rate This Thread: 5 : Excellent 4 : Good 3 : Average 2 : Bad 1 : Terrible

 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 User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Announcements     User Announcements FIRST     General Forum         FIRST E-Mail Blast Archive     Rumor Mill     Career     Robot Showcase Technical     Technical Discussion     Robotics Education and Curriculum     Motors     Electrical         CAN     Programming         NI LabVIEW         C/C++         Java         Python     Control System         FRC Control System         Sensors     Pneumatics     Kit & Additional Hardware     CAD         Inventor         SolidWorks         Creo     IT / Communications         3D Animation and Competition         Website Design/Showcase         Videography and Photography         Computer Graphics     National Instruments LabVIEW and Data Acquisition         LabView and Data Acquisition Competition     Unsung FIRST Heroes     Awards         Chairman's Award     Rules/Strategy         Scouting         You Make The Call     Team Organization         Fundraising         Starting New Teams         Finding A Team         College Teams     Championship Event     Regional Competitions     District Events     Off-Season Events     Thanks and/or Congrats     FRC Game Design     OCCRA         OCCRA Q&A         OCCRA Programming Other     Chit-Chat         Games/Trivia             Fantasy FIRST     Car Nack's Corner     College & University Education     Dean Kamen's Inventions     FIRST-related Organizations         Western Region Robotics Forum         Southern California Regional Robotics Forum         The Blue Alliance             Video Archives     FIRST In the News...     FIRST Lego League         Lego Mindstorm Discussion     FIRST Tech Challenge     VEX         VEX Robotics Competition         VEX IQ     Televised Robotics     Math and Science         NASA Discussion ChiefDelphi.com Website     CD Forum Support     Extra Discussion

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:44 AM.

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

 -- English (12 hour) -- English (24 hour) Contact Us - Chief Delphi - Rules - Archive - Top