|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
what is it for?
26-07-2006 18:11
sanddragWell that's one heck of a reduction (in a fairly lightweight package too). But why the (what appears to be) 1:1 gearing on the last stage? Also, you should render that thing in Inventor Studio if you have it. It will look nice.
Also, nice job filleting all your corners. However, your machinist won't be thrilled with that really pointy triangle. What do you need to get in there, like an 1/8" or 3/16" tool?
26-07-2006 18:26
Nuttyman54
hmm...how to turn your CIM into a Taigene 101? looks nice.
26-07-2006 20:42
Jeff 801|
Originally Posted by sanddrag
Well that's one heck of a reduction (in a fairly lightweight package too). But why the (what appears to be) 1:1 gearing on the last stage? Also, you should render that thing in Inventor Studio if you have it. It will look nice.
Also, nice job filleting all your corners. However, your machinist won't be thrilled with that really pointy triangle. What do you need to get in there, like an 1/8" or 3/16" tool? |
26-07-2006 21:49
...That's a lot of reduction. I also like the lightening method. However, as Sanddrag mentioned, you may want to make your corner filets a little larger, just to be friendly to the machinist.
26-07-2006 21:52
sanddragI really like how well you've done the "spokes" out from the bearing locations. It looks just great. 
26-07-2006 22:12
lukevanoort
Are you sure those spokes can take the torque of the final output, I'm no ME, but they look a little small to me. The big gears look about the same size throughout the gearbox, as do the little ones. So, lets say the little one looks about 12-15 tooth and the big ones look about 60. There look to be about 5 reductions, so I'm thinking a final output of 1.7-5.2 rpms. So, either turning swerve modules (seems a bit excessive) or some sort of arm? I might be a bit off on the tooth counts (hopefully not too far) but whatever the exact number is, that is one heck of a reduction.
26-07-2006 22:16
Bill_HancocJudging by Luke's calc of final output RPM which sounds about right....im guessing a telescoping arm mechanism or other arm mechanism...looks very cool tho
26-07-2006 22:18
Jeff 801Lukevanoort you were close the large gear is 70 teeth and the small gear is 12 teeth the final out put is 2.2 RPM 
26-07-2006 22:22
Jeff 801|
Originally Posted by Bill_Hancoc
Judging by Luke's calc of final output RPM which sounds about right....im guessing a telescoping arm mechanism or other arm mechanism...looks very cool tho
|
26-07-2006 23:38
Nitroxextreme|
Originally Posted by lukevanoort
Are you sure those spokes can take the torque of the final output, I'm no ME, but they look a little small to me. The big gears look about the same size throughout the gearbox, as do the little ones. So, lets say the little one looks about 12-15 tooth and the big ones look about 60. There look to be about 5 reductions, so I'm thinking a final output of 1.7-5.2 rpms. So, either turning swerve modules (seems a bit excessive) or some sort of arm? I might be a bit off on the tooth counts (hopefully not too far) but whatever the exact number is, that is one heck of a reduction.
|
26-07-2006 23:42
Morgan GillespieWhere are you counting a fifth reduction I count four... I had someone else look and they also only see four.
27-07-2006 01:47
sanddrag|
Originally Posted by Nitroxextreme
I agree with the torque concerns...
But how can you test something like that...the only thing I know of is COSMOS and that is only for solidworks. I really like the wight reduction designs though and if there are no torque problems that is an amazing gearbox. |
27-07-2006 02:03
=Martin=Taylor=|
Originally Posted by sanddrag
Also, nice job filleting all your corners. However, your machinist won't be thrilled with that really pointy triangle. What do you need to get in there, like an 1/8" or 3/16" tool?
|
27-07-2006 09:36
Jeff 801|
Originally Posted by Hachiban VIII
Why not spare your machinist a tremendous amount of trouble and cut all those holes yourself with a hand drill?
Round holes will be faster to cut and stronger to boot. True, you will probably want your machinist to machine down the gears since they require balance; but the frame? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- What do you plan on doing with your telescoping arm anyways? Any cool off-season projects a-brewing? Nice work. |
27-07-2006 13:48
sanddrag|
Originally Posted by Hachiban VIII
Why not spare your machinist a tremendous amount of trouble and cut all those holes yourself with a hand drill?
|
27-07-2006 20:58
Drew HopmanThanks to ASRC Aerospace we can get this cut out on the wire edm that they have, either that or the water jet.... The machining ability that we have gained is amazing! I have looked over some of the stress factors and I think it should work because it is ¼” thick plate for the sidewalls. I would like to commend Jeffery on his skills considering he is only in 8th grade but has mastered inventor and has the ability to think in a mechanical nature will be a great asset to the team.
27-07-2006 21:44
Nikhil Bajaj
I'd be more concerned about the strength of the gear teeth, especially in the later stages...if you take a CIM down to 2.2 rpm...you're going to be multiplying the max torque you can exert (it'll be around 90-100 oz-in when you trip the 40 A breaker) and if your free rpm is 2.2 rpm...then your gear ratio is somewhere around 2400...
240000 oz-in is a LOT of torque. be absolutely sure your gears can take it...you may have to step up the pitch a bit
but i totally agree...that amount of engineering proficiency and gumption in an 8th grader has the potential to be amazing...i look forward to future work.
27-07-2006 21:58
Karthik
|
Originally Posted by Drew Hopman
I would like to commend Jeffery on his skills considering he is only in 8th grade but has mastered inventor and has the ability to think in a mechanical nature will be a great asset to the team.
|
27-07-2006 22:23
Rohith Surampudi
wait...8th grader...thats amazing
wow thats really food, i was thinking you were a veteran senior...Your team is really lucky to have you
Keep up the good work
27-07-2006 22:33
Not2B
|
Originally Posted by Nitroxextreme
I agree with the torque concerns...
But how can you test something like that... |
28-07-2006 13:51
Jeff 801|
Originally Posted by nikkibajbaj
I'd be more concerned about the strength of the gear teeth, especially in the later stages...if you take a CIM down to 2.2 rpm...you're going to be multiplying the max torque you can exert (it'll be around 90-100 oz-in when you trip the 40 A breaker) and if your free rpm is 2.2 rpm...then your gear ratio is somewhere around 2400...
240000 oz-in is a LOT of torque. be absolutely sure your gears can take it...you may have to step up the pitch a bit but i totally agree...that amount of engineering proficiency and gumption in an 8th grader has the potential to be amazing...i look forward to future work. |
28-07-2006 14:32
Nikhil Bajaj
|
Originally Posted by Jeff 888
it is not the small CIM but the large CIM to be clear.
|
Keep up the good work.
28-07-2006 14:39
Jeff 801|
Originally Posted by nikkibajbaj
ah, well then...
free speed of around 2500 rpm down to 2.2...gear ratio of 1136...at your max current of 40 A, then that's 1136*240 oz-in = 272700ish oz-in, and then considering dynamic loading you need to multiply that by at least a factor of 2 for safety one would think. 550000 oz-in is a pretty hefty requirement. Although, to be honest you will probably never ever ever see anything in FIRST that requires that sort of reduction to do something. Unless next year's game is pick up an elephant and hang your robot on the bar carrying the elephant...which WOULD be pretty sweet to see aside from animal rights issues... Also consider that every mesh you make decreases efficiency by a few percent. Just things to keep in mind. Keep up the good work. |

28-07-2006 15:04
Nikhil Bajaj
|
Originally Posted by Jeff 888
the large gear reduction is for the speed that the arm gos up
![]() if it has that much strength than i need # 35 chain instead of # 25 |
28-07-2006 16:00
Jeff 801|
Originally Posted by nikkibajbaj
So are you just trying to reduce the speed of the motor? IE, is maximizing torque the concern or do you just want it to move slower?
|