 | | RE: compact designs —William Howard
|
| | | -----Original Message----- From: news-gateway@lugnet.com [mailto:news-gateway...net.com]On Behalf Of jan-tore Sent: 26 January 2002 01:43 (...) Which 9v motor? The old version or the new version - the new version is geared 350:1 relative to the old (...) (22 years ago, 31-Jan-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: compact designs —Thomas Avery
|
| | | | | (...) No way! Have a look at this: (URL) new geared 9v motor revolves at a ratio of 1:3.79 (approximate) of the old 9v motor. (...) If you can convince Steve Lane to give up details on his transmission design, I think he can help ;-) (...) Whoa. (...) (22 years ago, 31-Jan-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | RE: compact designs —William Howard
|
| | | | | | (...) ... repeat 98 times ... "I must check facts I have read before posting to newsgroups" I'd mis-remembered '350rpm' as '1:350 gearing' from the manual for the Motor Accessory set (8735, pg 9), and 350rpm is the 'official' lego number. (...) (...) (22 years ago, 31-Jan-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: compact designs —Thomas Avery
|
| | | | | | (...) LOL, the 1:350 ratio really grabbed my attention when I first read it. 350 rpm sounds reasonable. The MIT link states a measured RPM of 375. I guess it's very dependant on the input voltage. (...) No, Jan-Tore Skålvik originated this thread. (...) (22 years ago, 31-Jan-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | RE: compact designs —William Howard
|
| | | | | | (...) output (...) When I first built it I couldn't actually see the final shaft turning - then i calculated the reduction and stuck a 1x3 lift arm on the end to check that nothing was actually slipping. You still need quite a lot of patience to see (...) (22 years ago, 1-Feb-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: compact designs —Thomas Avery
|
| | | | | | (...) If the motor is spinning at 350 RPM, then the final output will rotate at about 0.17 RPM (with a 1:2016 reduction), ignoring friction losses. That's pretty slow. If you ignore frictin losses then the torque output will be 1210 ft*lb! (assuming (...) (22 years ago, 1-Feb-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | RE: compact designs —William Howard
|
| | | | | | (...) head, (...) But don't forget to wear protective goggles - I'd hate to see anyone get one of the 'teeth' of that 14t bevel gear in their eye as it shears under the strain. I reckon in not much more space (as it's sort of L shape looking from (...) (22 years ago, 1-Feb-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: compact designs —Jan-Tore Skålvik
|
| | | | First of all, I am grateful for the tips so far. Hm, about torque, I will probably need as much as possible, since one drive will be used to the mainboom of the heavy wrecker Iam working on. ((URL) Work-progress And I will implement 2 more drives (...) (22 years ago, 31-Jan-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | |
