docnjoj wrote:Whats the conversion fromm radians/sec to rpm?
Miles wrote:It's a pity eP doesn't contribute anymore...
dirty_d wrote:how would regular gears work? are they more efficient than belts? if they are it seems like that would be easier because you don't have to worry about anything slipping.
safe wrote:Basically as I recall the chain speed is not supposed to exceed about 100-200 rpm or you develop the problems.
safe wrote:I was thinking that a single gear-to-gear pair for a geardown of 1:3 combined with a secondary planetary geardown of another 1:4 would deliver a 1:12 reduction.
It's multiplication (not addition) when you combine gears right?
1:3 + 1:4 = 1:12
22:66 to 25:100 results in the equivalent of 550:6600 or 1:12
Drunkskunk wrote:The bearings are tiny, able to handle 100-300 hours of axial load, but not ment for high latteral torque loads. it would take carefull management of torque, probably with clutches and freewheels to keep the bearings from being overstressed.
Drunkskunk wrote:But its more than the technicle hurdles of a functional gear set. its also an efficancy problem. a single speed bike, with no derailer loses around 5-10% of the rider's power through the chain. add in the derailer and you lose another 5-10% (numbers taken from 2 bike shops)
Miles wrote:For #35 chain over 17t to 25t sprockets the maximum velocity would be about 4000 rpm
Users browsing this forum: stEVe and 5 guests