Talk:Industrial Robot Bill of Materials: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with "Hopefully we can get the cost down lower than the current estimate, though I'm not sure adding in a PowerCube at $3000 is completely fair. Still, it has to have a power source s...") |
(Reply to mjn) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Hopefully we can get the cost down lower than the current estimate, though I'm not sure adding in a PowerCube at $3000 is completely fair. Still, it has to have a power source somewhere. [[User:Mjn|Mjn]] 05:22, 28 May 2011 (PDT) | Hopefully we can get the cost down lower than the current estimate, though I'm not sure adding in a PowerCube at $3000 is completely fair. Still, it has to have a power source somewhere. [[User:Mjn|Mjn]] 05:22, 28 May 2011 (PDT) | ||
Based on the results of the finite element analysis for deflection, plus more information on the costs of the shaft encoder and gearbox, those costs will become estimated, likely for a lower total. The cost of the powercube has been put as a variable. [[User:YK|YK]] 18:55, 28 May 2011 (PDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 01:55, 29 May 2011
Hopefully we can get the cost down lower than the current estimate, though I'm not sure adding in a PowerCube at $3000 is completely fair. Still, it has to have a power source somewhere. Mjn 05:22, 28 May 2011 (PDT)
Based on the results of the finite element analysis for deflection, plus more information on the costs of the shaft encoder and gearbox, those costs will become estimated, likely for a lower total. The cost of the powercube has been put as a variable. YK 18:55, 28 May 2011 (PDT)