Microtractor Log: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
(formatted line breaks) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Lex Berezhny 8:39 PM | Lex Berezhny 8:39 PM | ||
Marcin: I just realized that with the current layout of the rotors you're still getting more than 44" | Marcin: I just realized that with the current layout of the rotors you're still getting more than 44" | ||
For example, if you look at Page 11 | For example, if you look at Page 11<br/> | ||
me 8:40 PM | me 8:40 PM | ||
I'm looking at it. Which dimension do you dispute? | I'm looking at it. Which dimension do you dispute?<br/> | ||
Lex Berezhny 8:40 PM | Lex Berezhny 8:40 PM | ||
44" | 44" | ||
because the rotor is 44" | because the rotor is 44" | ||
but you can see it doesn't go all the way to the edge | but you can see it doesn't go all the way to the edge<br/> | ||
me 8:40 PM | me 8:40 PM | ||
20" for platform, 2 tracks at 10" width each, and spac of 2" each. | 20" for platform, 2 tracks at 10" width each, and spac of 2" each.<br/> | ||
Lex Berezhny 8:40 PM | Lex Berezhny 8:40 PM | ||
so, you've got like another 6" i think | so, you've got like another 6" i think | ||
me 8:41 PM | me 8:41 PM | ||
My numbers add to 20+4+20. | My numbers add to 20+4+20.<br/> | ||
Lex Berezhny 8:41 PM | Lex Berezhny 8:41 PM | ||
isn't the rotor 44" long though? | isn't the rotor 44" long though?<br/> | ||
me 8:41 PM | me 8:41 PM | ||
No? | No? | ||
Rotor critical dimension is 22" from front plate to back plate. | Rotor critical dimension is 22" from front plate to back plate.<br/> | ||
Lex Berezhny joined group chat. | Lex Berezhny joined group chat.<br/> | ||
me 8:42 PM | me 8:42 PM | ||
Motor is on back plate, adding 8" more. | Motor is on back plate, adding 8" more.<br/> | ||
Lex Berezhny 8:42 PM | Lex Berezhny 8:42 PM | ||
Oh, so the shaft can be shortened? | Oh, so the shaft can be shortened? | ||
I thought the shaft length was also not changeable? | I thought the shaft length was also not changeable?<br/> | ||
me 8:43 PM | me 8:43 PM | ||
Then you have front shaft. Accounting for front shaft - 12" so it doesn't stick out beyond the tarck | Then you have front shaft. Accounting for front shaft - 12" so it doesn't stick out beyond the tarck | ||
track | track | ||
We can cut it if we want to whatever we need. 12 is plenty for track mounting. | We can cut it if we want to whatever we need. 12 is plenty for track mounting.<br/> | ||
Lex Berezhny 8:43 PM | Lex Berezhny 8:43 PM | ||
the on in sketchup is 28" | the on in sketchup is 28"<br/> | ||
me 8:43 PM | me 8:43 PM | ||
Sorry. | Sorry.<br/> | ||
Lex Berezhny 8:43 PM | Lex Berezhny 8:43 PM | ||
ah, okay | ah, okay | ||
hmmm, that changes things | hmmm, that changes things | ||
okay | okay<br/> | ||
me 8:44 PM | me 8:44 PM | ||
There are many inconsistencies, just saw some bad files on Lucas Log. | There are many inconsistencies, just saw some bad files on Lucas Log. | ||
We need to clean things up. | We need to clean things up.<br/> | ||
Lex Berezhny 6:14 PM Marcin: Does the length matter? Maybe if the platform is longer the powercube could be placed directly on platform without interfering with tracks? I assume the width is importan to fit through standard openings? But length could be longer, right? It's that dang Universal Rotor, it's just so huge for a "micro" tractor :-D me 6:16 PM To within practical limits of maneuverability. The longer they are, the more radial stress on axles upon turning. Our general design principle is not longer than wide. Toro is 70". http://www.toro.com/professional/sws/brochure/Track_specs.pdf Remember that we are using gutterpunk bearing systems - common 4-bolt flange bearings not designed for axial thrust. Lex Berezhny 6:16 PM okay, i'll keep that in mind, i'll try to modify the sketch, unfortunately i accidentally deleted the one i did yesterday, but that's okay, i'll try to make a new, better, one me 6:17 PM Otherwise, price goes way up. That's why we are doing articulated design - to allow huge machines with minimal axial thrust. sorry, radial thrust. Lex Berezhny 6:17 PM And there is no way to reduce the size of the rotor, right? me 6:17 PM Articulation for larger machines. No. Lex Berezhny 6:18 PM okay I'll think about it and try to come up with a new design and post it, I'll make sure to upload the sketch to wharehouse this time me 6:18 PM Basically, the above allows 10-100 cost reduction over industry standard Cat D7 bulldozer. Uplaod the old one too. Lex Berezhny 6:19 PM I accidentally deleted it. If i can't come up with a new/better design I'll recreate the one I did yesterday and upload that. me 6:19 PM https://www.facebook.com/OpenSourceEcology/photos/a.10151381815921562.574965.66469461561/10154027343551562/?type=1&theater Lex Berezhny 6:20 PM cool | Lex Berezhny 6:14 PM Marcin: Does the length matter? Maybe if the platform is longer the powercube could be placed directly on platform without interfering with tracks? I assume the width is importan to fit through standard openings? But length could be longer, right? It's that dang Universal Rotor, it's just so huge for a "micro" tractor :-D <br/>me 6:16 PM To within practical limits of maneuverability. The longer they are, the more radial stress on axles upon turning. Our general design principle is not longer than wide. Toro is 70". http://www.toro.com/professional/sws/brochure/Track_specs.pdf Remember that we are using gutterpunk bearing systems - common 4-bolt flange bearings not designed for axial thrust.<br/> Lex Berezhny 6:16 PM okay, i'll keep that in mind, i'll try to modify the sketch, unfortunately i accidentally deleted the one i did yesterday, but that's okay, i'll try to make a new, better, one <br/>me 6:17 PM Otherwise, price goes way up. That's why we are doing articulated design - to allow huge machines with minimal axial thrust. sorry, radial thrust. <br/>Lex Berezhny 6:17 PM And there is no way to reduce the size of the rotor, right?<br/> me 6:17 PM Articulation for larger machines. No.<br/> Lex Berezhny 6:18 PM okay I'll think about it and try to come up with a new design and post it, I'll make sure to upload the sketch to wharehouse this time <br/>me 6:18 PM Basically, the above allows 10-100 cost reduction over industry standard Cat D7 bulldozer. Uplaod the old one too. <br/>Lex Berezhny 6:19 PM I accidentally deleted it. If i can't come up with a new/better design I'll recreate the one I did yesterday and upload that. <br/>me 6:19 PM https://www.facebook.com/OpenSourceEcology/photos/a.10151381815921562.574965.66469461561/10154027343551562/?type=1&theater <br/>Lex Berezhny 6:20 PM cool | ||
Latest revision as of 10:59, 2 July 2015
Wed Jul 1, 2015
Lex Berezhny 8:39 PM
Marcin: I just realized that with the current layout of the rotors you're still getting more than 44"
For example, if you look at Page 11
me 8:40 PM
I'm looking at it. Which dimension do you dispute?
Lex Berezhny 8:40 PM
44"
because the rotor is 44"
but you can see it doesn't go all the way to the edge
me 8:40 PM
20" for platform, 2 tracks at 10" width each, and spac of 2" each.
Lex Berezhny 8:40 PM
so, you've got like another 6" i think
me 8:41 PM
My numbers add to 20+4+20.
Lex Berezhny 8:41 PM
isn't the rotor 44" long though?
me 8:41 PM
No?
Rotor critical dimension is 22" from front plate to back plate.
Lex Berezhny joined group chat.
me 8:42 PM
Motor is on back plate, adding 8" more.
Lex Berezhny 8:42 PM
Oh, so the shaft can be shortened?
I thought the shaft length was also not changeable?
me 8:43 PM
Then you have front shaft. Accounting for front shaft - 12" so it doesn't stick out beyond the tarck
track
We can cut it if we want to whatever we need. 12 is plenty for track mounting.
Lex Berezhny 8:43 PM
the on in sketchup is 28"
me 8:43 PM
Sorry.
Lex Berezhny 8:43 PM
ah, okay
hmmm, that changes things
okay
me 8:44 PM
There are many inconsistencies, just saw some bad files on Lucas Log.
We need to clean things up.
Lex Berezhny 6:14 PM Marcin: Does the length matter? Maybe if the platform is longer the powercube could be placed directly on platform without interfering with tracks? I assume the width is importan to fit through standard openings? But length could be longer, right? It's that dang Universal Rotor, it's just so huge for a "micro" tractor :-D
me 6:16 PM To within practical limits of maneuverability. The longer they are, the more radial stress on axles upon turning. Our general design principle is not longer than wide. Toro is 70". http://www.toro.com/professional/sws/brochure/Track_specs.pdf Remember that we are using gutterpunk bearing systems - common 4-bolt flange bearings not designed for axial thrust.
Lex Berezhny 6:16 PM okay, i'll keep that in mind, i'll try to modify the sketch, unfortunately i accidentally deleted the one i did yesterday, but that's okay, i'll try to make a new, better, one
me 6:17 PM Otherwise, price goes way up. That's why we are doing articulated design - to allow huge machines with minimal axial thrust. sorry, radial thrust.
Lex Berezhny 6:17 PM And there is no way to reduce the size of the rotor, right?
me 6:17 PM Articulation for larger machines. No.
Lex Berezhny 6:18 PM okay I'll think about it and try to come up with a new design and post it, I'll make sure to upload the sketch to wharehouse this time
me 6:18 PM Basically, the above allows 10-100 cost reduction over industry standard Cat D7 bulldozer. Uplaod the old one too.
Lex Berezhny 6:19 PM I accidentally deleted it. If i can't come up with a new/better design I'll recreate the one I did yesterday and upload that.
me 6:19 PM https://www.facebook.com/OpenSourceEcology/photos/a.10151381815921562.574965.66469461561/10154027343551562/?type=1&theater
Lex Berezhny 6:20 PM cool