RP
Ronaldo Persiano
Mon, Dec 25, 2017 6:21 PM
I would prefer to emphasize the unfolding of the Moebius ring.
I would prefer to emphasize the unfolding of the Moebius ring.
GF
Greg Frost
Tue, Dec 26, 2017 4:51 AM
I was thinking about that too. Both types of sculpture have merit I think. This should be possible with some sort of planetary gear driving the ring. I also like nophead's idea of a slot in the strip which I am modelling.
I was thinking about that too. Both types of sculpture have merit I think. This should be possible with some sort of planetary gear driving the ring. I also like nophead's idea of a slot in the strip which I am modelling.
> On 26 Dec 2017, at 4:51 am, Ronaldo Persiano <rcmpersiano@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I would prefer to emphasize the unfolding of the Moebius ring.
>
> <MoebiusAnim.gif>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenSCAD mailing list
> Discuss@lists.openscad.org
> http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
GF
Greg Frost
Tue, Dec 26, 2017 4:56 AM
Ronaldo's idea would require synchronisation between the drive wheels and the ring holding them. This may require teeth to maintain sync. The benefit of nophead's idea is you could use a friction fit where some slip would not matter.
Ronaldo's idea would require synchronisation between the drive wheels and the ring holding them. This may require teeth to maintain sync. The benefit of nophead's idea is you could use a friction fit where some slip would not matter.
MS
Mark Schafer
Tue, Dec 26, 2017 10:20 AM
two drive rings side by side would offer stability and enable friction
drive.
On 12/26/2017 5:56 PM, Greg Frost wrote:
two drive rings side by side would offer stability and enable friction
drive.
On 12/26/2017 5:56 PM, Greg Frost wrote:
> Ronaldo's idea would require synchronisation between the drive wheels and the ring holding them. This may require teeth to maintain sync. The benefit of nophead's idea is you could use a friction fit where some slip would not matter.
> _______________________________________________
> OpenSCAD mailing list
> Discuss@lists.openscad.org
> http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
>
>
PF
Peter Falke
Tue, Dec 26, 2017 6:11 PM
You could put a grove into the sides, than you could get by with only two
rollers.
2017-12-26 11:20 GMT+01:00 Mark Schafer mschafer@wireframe.biz:
two drive rings side by side would offer stability and enable friction
drive.
On 12/26/2017 5:56 PM, Greg Frost wrote:
You could put a grove into the sides, than you could get by with only two
rollers.
2017-12-26 11:20 GMT+01:00 Mark Schafer <mschafer@wireframe.biz>:
> two drive rings side by side would offer stability and enable friction
> drive.
>
>
>
> On 12/26/2017 5:56 PM, Greg Frost wrote:
>
>> Ronaldo's idea would require synchronisation between the drive wheels and
>> the ring holding them. This may require teeth to maintain sync. The benefit
>> of nophead's idea is you could use a friction fit where some slip would not
>> matter.
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenSCAD mailing list
>> Discuss@lists.openscad.org
>> http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
>> http://www.avg.com
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenSCAD mailing list
> Discuss@lists.openscad.org
> http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
>
GF
Greg Frost
Wed, Dec 27, 2017 7:34 AM
Nophead's idea of a slot seems to work fine. Now I have to work out how I
want to drive the mechanism.
http://forum.openscad.org/file/t622/Webp.gif
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
Nophead's idea of a slot seems to work fine. Now I have to work out how I
want to drive the mechanism.
<http://forum.openscad.org/file/t622/Webp.gif>
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
CC
Chris Camacho
Wed, Dec 27, 2017 11:04 AM
a fine theory (the animation) I'd love to see it working in actuality!
On 27/12/17 07:34, Greg Frost wrote:
a fine theory (the animation) I'd love to see it working in actuality!
On 27/12/17 07:34, Greg Frost wrote:
> Nophead's idea of a slot seems to work fine. Now I have to work out how I
> want to drive the mechanism.
> <http://forum.openscad.org/file/t622/Webp.gif>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenSCAD mailing list
> Discuss@lists.openscad.org
> http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
GF
Greg Frost
Wed, Dec 27, 2017 12:37 PM
Yes. Getting the alignment right is likely to be non trivial, so although it looks like it might work, there is a big risk that it won't.
So I have started looking at Ronaldo Persiano's idea of rotating the rollers that hold the möbius so that the strip looks like it is unfolding. The rotation will have to precisely relate to the feed rate of the rollers or it won't stay vertical. This is why I thought the möbius will need to have teeth to mesh with the rollers so that things can't get out of sync. Also, it is tricky to mesh the rotation of the rollers with the rotation of the frame that holds them. I have an idea that I think might work, but I'm finding it difficult to model.
On 27 Dec 2017, at 9:34 pm, Chris Camacho chris@bedroomcoders.co.uk wrote:
a fine theory (the animation) I'd love to see it working in actuality!
Yes. Getting the alignment right is likely to be non trivial, so although it looks like it might work, there is a big risk that it won't.
So I have started looking at Ronaldo Persiano's idea of rotating the rollers that hold the möbius so that the strip looks like it is unfolding. The rotation will have to precisely relate to the feed rate of the rollers or it won't stay vertical. This is why I thought the möbius will need to have teeth to mesh with the rollers so that things can't get out of sync. Also, it is tricky to mesh the rotation of the rollers with the rotation of the frame that holds them. I have an idea that I think might work, but I'm finding it difficult to model.
> On 27 Dec 2017, at 9:34 pm, Chris Camacho <chris@bedroomcoders.co.uk> wrote:
>
> a fine theory (the animation) I'd love to see it working in actuality!
>
>
>> On 27/12/17 07:34, Greg Frost wrote:
>> Nophead's idea of a slot seems to work fine. Now I have to work out how I
>> want to drive the mechanism.
>> <http://forum.openscad.org/file/t622/Webp.gif>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenSCAD mailing list
>> Discuss@lists.openscad.org
>> http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenSCAD mailing list
> Discuss@lists.openscad.org
> http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
P
Parkinbot
Wed, Dec 27, 2017 3:43 PM
Greg,
-
Yes, you are right, proper alignment of a narrow permanent slot is too
delicate. I'm convinced that it is much easier to include some bending or
hinge-based mechanics (and electronics) into the moebius that opens the ring
only during pass-by. It can be triggered e.g. by a hall sensor. Electric
supply is possible by conductor rails along the mobius faces ().
-
Ronaldos proposal can easily be realized with synchron motors (steppers)
with geared Moebius faces. The controller and drivers for the inner steppers
(three at best) will have to travel with the motors. Two conductors allow
for power supply (also carrying a sync peak).
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
Greg,
- Yes, you are right, proper alignment of a narrow permanent slot is too
delicate. I'm convinced that it is much easier to include some bending or
hinge-based mechanics (and electronics) into the moebius that opens the ring
only during pass-by. It can be triggered e.g. by a hall sensor. Electric
supply is possible by conductor rails along the mobius faces ().
- Ronaldos proposal can easily be realized with synchron motors (steppers)
with geared Moebius faces. The controller and drivers for the inner steppers
(three at best) will have to travel with the motors. Two conductors allow
for power supply (also carrying a sync peak).
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
CC
Chris Camacho
Wed, Dec 27, 2017 4:32 PM
I'd rather suspect less is more with this sort of implementation
whatever is most simple / elegant is likely to be implementable, as it
is I'm not even sure that nice 3 ring structure would actually work in
reality...
On 27/12/17 15:43, Parkinbot wrote:
Greg,
-
Yes, you are right, proper alignment of a narrow permanent slot is too
delicate. I'm convinced that it is much easier to include some bending or
hinge-based mechanics (and electronics) into the moebius that opens the ring
only during pass-by. It can be triggered e.g. by a hall sensor. Electric
supply is possible by conductor rails along the mobius faces ().
-
Ronaldos proposal can easily be realized with synchron motors (steppers)
with geared Moebius faces. The controller and drivers for the inner steppers
(three at best) will have to travel with the motors. Two conductors allow
for power supply (also carrying a sync peak).
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
I'd rather suspect less is more with this sort of implementation
whatever is most simple / elegant is likely to be implementable, as it
is I'm not even sure that nice 3 ring structure would actually work in
reality...
On 27/12/17 15:43, Parkinbot wrote:
> Greg,
> - Yes, you are right, proper alignment of a narrow permanent slot is too
> delicate. I'm convinced that it is much easier to include some bending or
> hinge-based mechanics (and electronics) into the moebius that opens the ring
> only during pass-by. It can be triggered e.g. by a hall sensor. Electric
> supply is possible by conductor rails along the mobius faces ().
>
> - Ronaldos proposal can easily be realized with synchron motors (steppers)
> with geared Moebius faces. The controller and drivers for the inner steppers
> (three at best) will have to travel with the motors. Two conductors allow
> for power supply (also carrying a sync peak).
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenSCAD mailing list
> Discuss@lists.openscad.org
> http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
