by NovaOne » Fri Feb 15, 2008 9:01 am
by NovaOne
Fri Feb 15, 2008 9:01 am
How is it working with the linkages in reference to the entire assembly remaining tight enough during walking?
I imaging looking at photos this method looks...clumsy or "Heath Robinson" ..I can't deny it might be more vulnerable QED
The structural rigidity of the hip seems unaffected because the bearings are clamped quite tightly together using an M5 screw held in place with Loctite thread retaining compound. The Black 4mm washer shown is made of nylon 66 molybdenum disulfide
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ab2d2/ab2d22e63b51d1f2a87592efc45388c2b5c70327" alt="Rolling Eyes :roll:"
. ..... I think I currently have the screw/washer/nut clamp assembly upside down because the nylon washer seems to have more friction against the bracket than the lower aluminium "nut"? (shown in the first picture above)
The brackets are held together so firmly using this arrangement, that before I considered the con rods, I was looking a spur gears to couple the servo to the leg. I thought a 2:1 ratio to double the torque and half the rotation angle to 90 degrees would mean I could use a cheaper servo??????
If structural rigidity proves to be a problem in the future I might try a slightly larger diameter bearing ie OD=22mm .
My main problem was counter balancing the new mass distribution......I have moved the batteries to the front, more pictures to follow. I hope most of the stock moves are unaffected ??????
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0c37d/0c37dec09964d8d3ba7d16e117ad86036c940105" alt="Image"
How is it working with the linkages in reference to the entire assembly remaining tight enough during walking?
I imaging looking at photos this method looks...clumsy or "Heath Robinson" ..I can't deny it might be more vulnerable QED
The structural rigidity of the hip seems unaffected because the bearings are clamped quite tightly together using an M5 screw held in place with Loctite thread retaining compound. The Black 4mm washer shown is made of nylon 66 molybdenum disulfide
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ab2d2/ab2d22e63b51d1f2a87592efc45388c2b5c70327" alt="Rolling Eyes :roll:"
. ..... I think I currently have the screw/washer/nut clamp assembly upside down because the nylon washer seems to have more friction against the bracket than the lower aluminium "nut"? (shown in the first picture above)
The brackets are held together so firmly using this arrangement, that before I considered the con rods, I was looking a spur gears to couple the servo to the leg. I thought a 2:1 ratio to double the torque and half the rotation angle to 90 degrees would mean I could use a cheaper servo??????
If structural rigidity proves to be a problem in the future I might try a slightly larger diameter bearing ie OD=22mm .
My main problem was counter balancing the new mass distribution......I have moved the batteries to the front, more pictures to follow. I hope most of the stock moves are unaffected ??????
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0c37d/0c37dec09964d8d3ba7d16e117ad86036c940105" alt="Image"