I am an engineer by profession and teach mechanical engineering and physics at a vocational school. In my free time I like to create 3D animations, even though I'm not a professional at it. This RU-vid channel is the logical result of combining my profession and my hobby. Have fun with it.
On my channel you will find all kinds of stuff about mechanical engineering and physics for study, school and work.
The images and animations shown in the videos are almost exclusively generated with the 3D-software Blender. Therefore, the images and animations do not claim correctness of the illustrated contents.
Feel free to share the videos, but do not upload them to other platforms without first asking for consent.
@tec-science Hi..I have a doubt regarding rotational motion Consider a merry go round (disc) with two persons A and B sitting on diametrically opposite points of the disc (facing each other). The disc is rotating about its center. When we calculate the relative velocity of B with respect to A by usual subtraction of velocities, we get Vba = ωr-(-ωr)= 2ωr. But from point of view of A, B never moves and it seems that B is stationary from his view point. How to resolve this contradiction? I know this question is unrelated to the video, but I would be really grateful if you could answer this for me.
are the formulas for d and D switched? The current formulas would imply that the diameter of the base circle(d) should be larger than the pitch circle(D).
ja echt brutal wie du auch makro und mikro und das gesamtbild in zusammenhang mit den details setzt! im studium lernt man immer nur alle details hinter einandern und es fällt oft schwer da durchzublicken bis ich deine videos angeschaut habe!
This is just a notation I use to make the difference between a result and a condition clear. "=" ultimately means "is the result of something" and "=!" means "is a condition that we presuppose".
Each point on the gear is ultimately a superposition of the movement of the centre of gravity (which is the same for all points considered) and the rotational movement. The gear, and therefore the rotation, moves with the centre of gravity and not with the circumferential speed. The linear speed distribution (shown in blue) is thus shifted to the right by the amount of the centre of gravity speed. In fact, if the gear itself did not rotate around its center of gravity, which means that a marked tooth on the gear would always be at the 12 o'clock position as the center of gravity moves on a circular path, then every point on the gear would actually move at the same speed, regardless of the radius. The speed at each point on the gear would be the speed of the center of gravity.
@@tec-science Isn't Vc (at the center of gravity of the planet gear) equal to Nc (angular velocity of carrier) times the distance between the center of carrier arm and the center of planet gear? In the same way, will the velocity not vary throughout the planet gear (I am talking only about the velocity due to rotation of carrier arm. The velocity indicated in green colour in the video)?
I think I understand your problem. But the linear velocity distribution of the planet gear has its center of gravity as its reference. The linear velocity distribution is related to this center of gravity. If this center of gravity now moves with the velocity vc (velocity of the carrier), then the entire linear velocity distribution is superimposed by this velocity vc. The entire linear velocity distribution is shifted by this amount. Therefore, the velocity vc is added to the entire velocity distribution regardless of the radius considered on the planet gear.
@@tec-science I understand your explanation. You have superimposed the velocity due to rotation of planet gear due to its rotation about its center of gravity (blue velocity vectors)and the velocity due to the velocity of the center of gravity itself. However, will not the velocity Vc be constant (green velocity vectors) throughout only if the gear was moving in a straight line? In this case, the planet gear is undergoing revolution about the carrier center, not translation in a straight line. So, the green velocity distribution should also linearly vary (instead of being constant, as shown in the green distribution). Please correct me if I am wrong.
ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-MQ9EwtqR9gU.html I think your mistake is that when you superimpose the movements where the planet gear is initially assumed not to rotate, you think that the planet gear is firmly locked to the carrier. However, with this assumption, the planet gear rotates once around itself with each revolution of the carrier (this false assumption leads to the coin rotation paradox). When it is said that the planet gear does not rotate while the carrier rotates, this means that, for example, a marked tooth on the gear that is at the 12 o'clock position is there for the entire rotation (see the animation in the link). There is no linear speed distribution, but the planet gear has a constant speed along its entire diameter (shown in green).
β refers to the rotation of the planet gear when the sun gear is stationary. Now, however, the movement of the sun gear is superimposed on this and turns the planet gear backwards, so that the planet gear now effectively covers the angle 𝝳.
On my website you will find several articles on the subject of fluid mechanics. I can't say when I'll get around to making a video about this. But it will certainly take some time.
The minimum number of teeth on pinion to avoid interference is given as: T = 2aw/((1+G((G)+2)sin2φ)^0.5 - 1), where G is the gear ratio. When we substitute G-> infinity for the case of Rack and pinion, we do not get the formula for minimum number of teeth on pinion for Rack & Pinion (T = 2aw/(sin2φ)). Where am I making a mistake?
I’ve been looking for a proper explanation and derivation on cycloidal drives and haven’t been able to find anything beyond a copy and paste of the equations or an ambiguous explanation. This is by far the best video on this I have found, thank you!
Im trying to solve a problem on my bike. And this is very helpful! What i got from it is that loosening the chain that changes speeds, it automatically slides to gear 3 (and perhaps makes shifting gears obsolete). The problem i had was mitigated (:the pedals were "Jumpy" and felt like losing the chain or changing gears by itself) !
Die CG-Stimmen heutzutage sind echt kaum noch von natürlichen Stimmen unterscheiden. Auch wenn die alten Stimmen ihren eigenen Charm hatten, weiter so!
@@tec-science Der Inhalt war natürlich auch wieder klasse. Kannte die Formeln nur im Englischen als Capstan-Equation, hier im Video als Anwendungsfall für spiellose Robotikgetriebe: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-MwIBTbumd1Q.htmlsi=w7pkTpvG_K86YctR&t=853
Glad to have such great video...Salute for the effort you made. one small confusion may be am wrong ...at video 11:06 You mention da = do+2ha ...how come da=do+ha which means da=m(z+1) not m(z+2)
Great video with detailed breakdowns of different situations! I am also impressed by the cycliodal drive video I saw at yours a few days ago. I just wonder if it would be convenient for your cannel to explain how RV gearbox works and how overall transmission ratio is calculated in this case in the near future, as the story becomes more complex when a planetary gear is mated with a cycloidal drive as a secondary output. Many mechanical designers are suffering from that : ) Appreciate your great job!
Actually, I have never had anything to do with RV gearboxes. I'm going to look into it and see if I can make a video about it. However, it may be some time before I get around to it.
At first I also thought that a belt drive is simply a belt that is placed around a pulley - that's it. Until you have to dimension such a thing yourself: rope friction equation, centrifugal forces, bending stresses, elastic slip, optimum belt speed, pre-tension, belt tensioner systems, etc. I will make a whole series of videos on this.
