|
|
|
 FRC competitions are fun, people. If you honestly need a video game system to keep you interested, you're ignoring a tremendous experience. - Mr. Pockets [more] |
 |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
I posted a CIM-in-wheel swerve not too long ago, and it inspired me to design a swerve that had a horizontal CIM motor, but still coaxial.
3.6:1 gear ratio on a 2.25" wheel.
4.4" tall.
Inventor says it should weigh 5.2lbs.
Any questions or comments are welcome.
Discussion
view entire thread
17-05-2015 20:01
glennword
Re: pic: Short coaxial swerve module
While I applaud your efforts, I have to ask, what benefits does having the CIM in a horizontal orientation get you? And are those benefits worth the extra complexity, part count, efficiency loss from the extra miter stage, and potentially weight? (not sure if the last one is a factor or not) The only benefit I can think of that might even be measurable is a lower CG, although I don't foresee that being much of a difference. I would suggest investigating worm gears in the future if you wish to bring this design into reality. You can get a nice, high, relatively efficient reduction in a single stage, and it sets you up nicely to go coaxial. Anyways, I love seeing your designs posted here fairly regularly, you have a tendency to think outside the box which is fantastic. Keep up the good work!
17-05-2015 20:24
Joey Milia
Re: pic: Short coaxial swerve module
|
Originally Posted by glennword
I would suggest investigating worm gears in the future if you wish to bring this design into reality. You can get a nice, high, relatively efficient reduction in a single stage, and it sets you up nicely to go coaxial.
|
17-05-2015 21:04
glennword
Re: pic: Short coaxial swerve module
|
Originally Posted by Joey Milia
I won't dispute worm gears high reductions but i wouldn't describe them as relatively efficient. The highest efficiently you'll get is 86% with a four lead worm. At best this would be replacing the two stages before the co-axial, a miter stage and a timing belts stage, each around 95% or higher. I too am unsure of the benefits of a horizontal cim for a coaxial swerve but I don't think a worm gear would be beneficial on the Cim motor. However, using a worm gear for the steering motor is a different issue and has more merits in my opinion.
|
17-05-2015 21:05
Bryce2471
Re: pic: Short coaxial swerve module
|
Originally Posted by glennword
While I applaud your efforts, I have to ask, what benefits does having the CIM in a horizontal orientation get you? And are those benefits worth the extra complexity, part count, efficiency loss from the extra miter stage, and potentially weight? (not sure if the last one is a factor or not) The only benefit I can think of that might even be measurable is a lower CG, although I don't foresee that being much of a difference. I would suggest investigating worm gears in the future if you wish to bring this design into reality. You can get a nice, high, relatively efficient reduction in a single stage, and it sets you up nicely to go coaxial. Anyways, I love seeing your designs posted here fairly regularly, you have a tendency to think outside the box which is fantastic. Keep up the good work!
|
|
Originally Posted by Joey Milia
I won't dispute worm gears high reductions but i wouldn't describe them as relatively efficient. The highest efficiently you'll get is 86% with a four lead worm. At best this would be replacing the two stages before the co-axial, a miter stage and a timing belts stage, each around 95% or higher. I too am unsure of the benefits of a horizontal cim for a coaxial swerve but I don't think a worm gear would be beneficial on the Cim motor. However, using a worm gear for the steering motor is a different issue and has more merits in my opinion.
|
17-05-2015 23:46
asid61
Re: pic: Short coaxial swerve module
Amazing as usual. 
Thank you for sharing this on CD.
That weight is interestingly low. What is the thickness of the top plate? ARe you still using 1/4" diameter balls for the 16-style bearing?
EDIT: And which miter gears are those? They don't look like Vex ones.
18-05-2015 19:13
Bryce2471
Re: pic: Short coaxial swerve module
|
Originally Posted by asid61
Amazing as usual.
Thank you for sharing this on CD.That weight is interestingly low. What is the thickness of the top plate? ARe you still using 1/4" diameter balls for the 16-style bearing? EDIT: And which miter gears are those? They don't look like Vex ones. |
The weight is a little lower than I expected as well, considering the added complexity. I attribute the lower weight to the caster portion being smaller. It now fits into a 72 tooth 20 dp gear from VEX instead of an 84 tooth.
The top plate is 0.25'' thick so that the plate that the CIM mounts to can be attached to the side of it with 6 32 bolts.
Yes, the steering gear and the bottom gearbox plate have grooves milled in them for 0.25" delrin balls.
The first set of miter gears are 1 module, 20 tooth because they have 8mm bore, and they're a little smaller. The later ones, in the caster, are 20 tooth 20 dp, because my team has had success with them in the past. They are both made of steel, and from SDP-SI.
20-05-2015 19:02
Chinske4296That'd be awesome if it weighed that little. I don't really trust inventors weight estimates, I've gotten burned by that in the past. Not that I don't trust you or anything. Looks awesome!
view entire thread
Tags
loading ...