 | | Re: A couple of gear questions
|
|
(...) He probably means two clutch gears in a single axle, meshing with two other gears which also share an axle. That way (in parallel) they should slip at twice the nominal torque. (15 years ago, 18-Apr-09, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: A couple of gear questions
|
|
"Tim (Smith)" <tsmith7057@comcast.net> wrote in message news:KI7yAw.23B@lugnet.com... (...) You won't get twice the allowable torque. What you'll get is a proportionate increase in torque as the load on the output from the clutch gears approaches (...) (15 years ago, 17-Apr-09, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: A couple of gear questions
|
|
(...) That's not a bug- it's a feature. The point is to protect the motor from damage. That said, I bet if you used two clutch gears you'll get twice the allowable torque. I don't recommend it- but you could try it and see what you think. (15 years ago, 17-Apr-09, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: A couple of gear questions
|
|
(...) With the PF and NXT motors, i perhaps agree with you. Of course, you can get any torque limit you want by gearing up and then back down, it's just more awkward. (15 years ago, 16-Apr-09, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: A couple of gear questions
|
|
(...) For most applications it dosen't really pose a noticeable problem. However this inconsistancey is due to the internal structure and the way in which friction is achived. (URL) the only problem I have with it is that the clutch slips way too (...) (15 years ago, 16-Apr-09, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: A couple of gear questions
|
|
(...) I think it's a non-issue for the most part. The torque isn't really "over a range" - it's different for different clutch gears, but for any *single* clutch gear it's pretty constant. After all, if it has a point at which it starts slipping, it (...) (15 years ago, 16-Apr-09, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: A couple of gear questions
|
|
(...) (URL) you can see the writing, and why the torque over a range. Is a non constant-clutching like this good or bad? What do people think? (15 years ago, 16-Apr-09, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Shock absorbers stiffness
|
|
An approximate measurement of stiffness of different shock absorbers at full compression. (3 URLs) Philo> (15 years ago, 13-Apr-09, to lugnet.technic, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Help needed on gear spacing, and another question
|
|
(...) No! They're properly aligned. ;) They just look like that, because the way the worm termination is done. However the screw works continuous and smoothly. (15 years ago, 8-Apr-09, to lugnet.technic, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Help needed on gear spacing, and another question
|
|
(...) Is it just me, or do those worm gears look like the haven't been aligned properly? (15 years ago, 8-Apr-09, to lugnet.technic, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Help needed on gear spacing, and another question
|
|
While the worm and 1x4 rack pitch are not the same and they do not mesh perfectly, it is still possible to make them work together in a reliable way. You may see one example below, (URL) Originally posted at TechnicBRICKs (URL) (15 years ago, 7-Apr-09, to lugnet.technic, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Help needed on gear spacing, and another question
|
|
(...) For instance, have a "floating" worm-gear-based gearbox sliding along that axle, with the 8t gears engaging an external stationary rack? If the worm gear doesn't have very far to travel, you could also substitute a rack gear or two for a (...) (15 years ago, 3-Apr-09, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Help needed on gear spacing, and another question
|
|
(...) Although not by far as nice and compact as Mike's suggestion I stumbled upon the following solution after a bit of tinkering: (URL) (15 years ago, 3-Apr-09, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Help needed on gear spacing, and another question
|
|
(...) Rafe, Must the worm gear mesh directly with the gear rack? Or, could you put a 24tooth gear in between? (worm->24->rack) Steve (15 years ago, 3-Apr-09, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Help needed on gear spacing, and another question
|
|
(...) Try this inversion trick: (URL) (15 years ago, 3-Apr-09, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: PF train motor
|
|
(...) So am I. However, I'm also into R/C aircraft so I have a long history with batteries and motors and could talk your ear off about them. I could also explain why the battery pack costs so much! (...) Yes, I give you permission to go home. You (...) (15 years ago, 3-Apr-09, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Help needed on gear spacing, and another question
|
|
(...) Technic worm gears are not really made to mesh with the 1x4 racks. The problem is that the racks do not have any pitch (the gear teeth are perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the rack). The worm gear, by definition, does have a pitch. In (...) (15 years ago, 3-Apr-09, to lugnet.technic, FTX)
|
| |
| | Help needed on gear spacing, and another question
|
|
Hi all, I have two requests; any help would be appreciated. First question: what is the proper spacing to use when using a worm gear to drive a rack gear? I have (supposing studs up) a horizontal axle with a standard worm gear (4716) on the axle. I (...) (15 years ago, 3-Apr-09, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: PF train motor
|
|
(...) Eric: Thanks for the awesome explanation! I learned new stuff today...does that mean I can go home now? :-) I'm excited to see how the new motor and battery box pull. I think the new PF trains could add a lot of functionality to existing 9V (...) (15 years ago, 3-Apr-09, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: PF train motor
|
|
(...) They made it 7.4V because all lithium polymer battery cells are 3.6 - 3.8V. Since this is a pack with 2 cells in series, you get 7.4V. A 3 cell pack is typically 11.2V. As you can see, keeping the old 9V system was not really an option if (...) (15 years ago, 3-Apr-09, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics)
|
