|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
Still CAD-ing away! I was going to stop after 15 gearboxes, but I came across a similar design and I just HAD to do it
Third inverted CIM gearbox made, which allows for more electronics space, or for whatever needs to go inside the frame perimeter. Still iffy about the fact that there are three CIMs for this one due to brownouts, but I have some feeling that I could get away with it, given that number of motors for other parts are limited, and there is no motor quantity restriction.
Specs:
Weight: 11.40 lbs
High Speed (adjusted): 18.06 fps
Low Speed (adjusted): 6.02 fps
Files, including STEP files can be found in my GrabCAD folder under GBX-116.
Link: https://workbench.grabcad.com/workbench/projects/gcOhfXOehYETdalk4HNJ_3A0HceTxrt6Dv4ytxedJppYkO#/space/gcy-RpuR7fueMhPxpys8KUh7yF1NwcTEWAlStxFm6c3ypj
Now I'm really going to halt working on gearboxes (with the exception of another one I'm working with someone else on the team) and do something else 
30-12-2015 12:15
cbale2000Have teams actually gotten away with cantilevering gearbox gears like this on competition machines? Maybe it's just me, but it seems like a REALLY bad idea, and I've been seeing more and more of it lately. 
30-12-2015 12:21
Aren SiekmeierYou will never get a perfect mesh all the way around a loop of gears. You may even mash teeth depending on tolerances and how things line up.
I would also be concerned about the cantilevered gears, since they do transmit torque, and it seems they are only riding on one bearing.
30-12-2015 12:30
aldaeronDesign Comment
I think the previous poster has the same thought, but your center CIM gear between the two other gears is asking for trouble. There will be some manufacturing tolerances and it will mesh well on one side and poorly on the other side and probably shred the gear teeth. No Fun.
Since you seem to like designing gearboxes - what about one where you are trying to keep CG low by keeping the CIMs at or near the same distance from the ground that the drive axle is? Probably not the most useful as you are only lowering the CIM a few inches, but would be fun to see what you come up with!
SolidWorks Comment
I like that you included your SW files, but you did not include them all. This is a common enough problem that SolidWorks has a feature for it called "Pack and Go" under the File menu. It allows you to take an entire assembly and copy all the parts. You can flatten them to a single folder (recommended) and even ZIP them up, all in one step. Great for sharing whole assemblies while keeping them in SW formats (instead of STEP).
-matto-
30-12-2015 12:33
z_beeblebrox
|
Design Comment
I think the previous poster has the same thought, but your center CIM gear between the two other gears is asking for trouble. There will be some manufacturing tolerances and it will mesh well on one side and poorly on the other side and probably shred the gear teeth. No Fun. |
30-12-2015 12:50
Jared|
Have teams actually gotten away with cantilevering gearbox gears like this on competition machines? Maybe it's just me, but it seems like a REALLY bad idea, and I've been seeing more and more of it lately.
![]() |
30-12-2015 13:22
Aren Siekmeier|
Three CIMs have a combined stall torque of around 1000 in-oz, and pinions have a pitch radius of around .3 inches, so the tangential force at the pitch circle is around 3000 oz or 190 lbs force. FRC gears have a pressure angle of 14.5 degrees, so the radial load is 190 x tan 14.5, which is 50 lbs.
50 lbs is less than a cantilevered wheel will experience on a WCD and these shafts do not commonly bend. |
30-12-2015 17:37
Joey Milia|
What about it seems like a bad idea?
EDIT: I just noticed theres only one bearing. This is a bad idea. If there was a second bearing, it would likely be okay for the following reasons. Cantilevering the gear has no effect on torsional loads, and the gear/shaft has no significant axial loading, so we only need to worry about radial loading on shaft and bearings. Three CIMs have a combined stall torque of around 1000 in-oz, and pinions have a pitch radius of around .3 inches, so the tangential force at the pitch circle is around 3000 oz or 190 lbs force. FRC gears have a pressure angle of 14.5 degrees, so the radial load is 190 x tan 14.5, which is 50 lbs. 50 lbs is less than a cantilevered wheel will experience on a WCD and these shafts do not commonly bend. |
30-12-2015 19:48
GeeTwo
I'm not sure if there's a reasonable way to do this, but if you could move the pancake cylinder to the other side of the gearbox, you could get the wheels a lot closer to the edge of the robot.
30-12-2015 20:53
Cash4587|
I'm not sure if there's a reasonable way to do this, but if you could move the pancake cylinder to the other side of the gearbox, you could get the wheels a lot closer to the edge of the robot.
|
30-12-2015 21:10
GeeTwo
|
How would that get the wheels closer to the edge of the robot? As far as I can tell this gearbox is intended to be used on a WCD set up which already is as close as the wheels can get to the edge of a robot.
|
30-12-2015 22:08
Cash4587|
Looking at the render, I thought the wheel was just between the gearbox plates. If the wheel is by the "wire" end of the CIMs, then consider this modified so that moving the cylinder would cause the module would use up less space inside the robot, which I understand to be the main point of inverted CIM.
|
30-12-2015 22:24
GeeTwo
|
Oh ok, makes more sense now. The way the gearbox is set up, I don't think it's feasible at all to move the cylinder.
|
31-12-2015 00:35
asid61A possible fix for the cantilever gear would be to have a bearing in the gear riding on a "dead axle"- a screw with a spacer on it going into a tapped plate.
31-12-2015 05:49
Cash4587|
I haven't worked much with shifting gearboxes, so maybe this is a silly question, but could the shifting be moved up to the output of the cluster axle, rather than the input of the wheel axle? With the wheel all the way out by the ends of the CIMs, this looks like there would be enough room for the pancake on the other side. This would obviously be a higher-speed, lower torque shift, so perhaps a different shift mechanism would be in order.
|
31-12-2015 05:51
Cash4587|
A possible fix for the cantilever gear would be to have a bearing in the gear riding on a "dead axle"- a screw with a spacer on it going into a tapped plate.
|
31-12-2015 13:19
Aren Siekmeier|
That wouldn't fix the fact that it is still cantilevered. There would need to be a supporting plate on the other side of the gear to reduce the kinds of loads a cantilevered gear sees vs a non cantilevered one.
|