Subject:
|
Re: bushing (bush) question
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Sat, 25 Aug 2001 22:37:49 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Fredrik Glöckner <fredrik.glockner@=spamless=bio.uio.no>
|
Viewed:
|
1065 times
|
| |
|
|
"Ross Crawford" <rcrawford@csi.com> writes:
> Note also that Type 1 & 2 are also slightly wider than a smooth 1/2
> bush - about half the thickness of a tooth wider.
No, I've found that all the half bushes share the same width: 1/2 stud.
> Two of them butted together (tooth side) is exactly the same width
> as 2 smooths (or a single full bush).
Again, I've found that two old style half bushes together (with the
tooth side facing each other), are _narrower_ than a full bush (or two
smooth bushes). They are narrower by the thickness of the teeth.
The configuration with two old style bushes together is used in the
8459 Front Loader to secure the wheel axles. By using two, more
rigidty is achieved. Plus, since they are narrower than one stud,
they don't imply any extra friction on the axles.
Fredrik
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: bushing (bush) question
|
| (...) Note also that Type 1 & 2 are also slightly wider than a smooth 1/2 bush - about half the thickness of a tooth wider. Two of them butted together (tooth side) is exactly the same width as 2 smooths (or a single full bush). And as TJ says, (...) (23 years ago, 24-Aug-01, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.technic)
|
13 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
