I should clairify…
The convex of the pinion rotating such that it meshes with the concave of the driven gear would be reversing, like @ShutterShock and @ZachTetra were referring to. In this situation, the gears want to pull together, thus creating zero backlash, and mashing the teeth together.
The forward direction, (correct) like @Venom121212 stated, will push the gears apart. Naturally, thrust bearings are recommended.
9 Likes
Thank you for clarifying, I was still mentally kicking myself for getting them backwards.
4 Likes
When can we see your new drives?
1 Like
Pics of the gears when I started playing with this. As for the rest, I may start a separate thread when I’m ready.
19 Likes
Will it stay 2:1 ?
Would prime numbers of teeth cause more even tooth wear?
Prototype is, but I’d like to be around 2.5:1 for Mad wheels.
If things go well, I’d like to have a set for Pneumatics as well.
No clue, never thought about that.
4 Likes
Yes it’s best to keep the teeth count between the two gears relative primes for the most even wear
4 Likes
Can I change our gears to a different ratio with off-the-shelf spiral bevel gears? (That the housing can accommodate of course)
1 Like
I’d guess not unless they were remachined a bit.
3 Likes
The mesh offsets would be different so each gear would have different spacers depending on the ratio, and the tooth engagements wouldn’t be perfect unless you swapped them as pairs, but you should be able to change them
2 Likes
Wait… wait…. Wait…. Is this getting reborn? Jesus! @Savage1 an actual production model would make so much money. I get comments non stop on mine and could easily make a list of buyers. Hell I’d invest if you wanted to make it into a company.
9 Likes
Why is that? When it comes to mating teeth, do the more promiscuous ones get less wear?
Quoted from the following article: Gear design - RepRap
"Gears typically have prime (or at least co-prime) numbers of teeth. This is so that the same teeth do not always press against one another, so distributing wear, dirt, oil and squashed fingers etc. evenly across all gear teeth involved.
Bad: 15 and 25 teeth. A bump on the large gear always hits the same 3 teeth on the small gear, creating uneven wear; in this same example a bump of the small gear always hits the same 5 teeth on the large gear. To calculate this first find the Greatest Common Divisor (GCD) of each gear tooth count. e.g. GCD(15,25)=5; then divide this result into the number of teeth in question. E.g. 15/5=3 and 25/5=5.
Good: 16 and 25 teeth. A bump on the large gear (eventually) hits every tooth on the small gear, wearing them all equally.
An even uniform gear wear is achieved by ensuring the tooth counts of the two gears meshing together are “relatively prime” to each other; this occurs when the Greatest Common Divisor (GCD) of each gear tooth count equals 1. e.g. GCD(16,25)=1."
4 Likes
Maybe, just toying with it currently.
Lol, I’ve never thought of using lots of money and Eska8 in the same sentence.
Should fun though. 
7 Likes
Take my money immediately
1 Like
Unless it’s SPENDING lots of money 
6 Likes
What is the outer diameter of the wheel gear?
1 Like
You want coprime numbers on gears so they don’t always hit the same teeth this spreads the way evenly around, maximising the gears life span.
Look at your floors at home where it’s most worn out in the doorways are you always tread? End of life is when one part is worn out even tho the part in the corner under a char looks brand new.
Tho I would like more of a 3-1 gear ratio personally taking advantage of the higher efficiency of higher kv motors
Edit: never mined @Dinnye said it better than me
3 Likes