Alternative to Ball Screw or Rack-n-Pinion


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 39

Thread: Alternative to Ball Screw or Rack-n-Pinion

  1. #1
    Registered
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    253
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Alternative to Ball Screw or Rack-n-Pinion

    Saw this and thought it might be interesting to some people. Its a kinky kind of rack-n-pinion, only different. They say it's Zero-Backlash! Check out Roller Pinion from Nexen. I may have to try one of these sometime just to see how well they work. Very unique!

    Similar Threads:


  2. #2
    Registered
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    399
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    Hey that thing is really cool! If you try it, be sure to report on it here. Any idea on the cost?

    Arvid



  3. #3
    Registered
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    253
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    They don't have their prices listed. Does anyone? I call these "Stealth Products". Like so many other motion control specialists they don't list prices and want you to play phone/email tag with their sales staff before you find anything out. They said in their brochure it costs more than a rack system but less than a ball screw. Whatever that means.

    Here is a brochure they gave me:
    Roller Pinion Brochure, PDF - Adobe Acrobat Format

    Revised:
    The Linear Distance Per Revolution of the thing is 6.3" for the smallest model - RPS16. That is about twice the length of a regular pinion gear, assuming you chose the smallest regular pinion. This just means you have some more stepping-down to do.

    Last edited by samualt; 11-16-2004 at 05:32 PM.


  4. #4
    Registered
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    253
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    Well, I got a reply from them on their smallest model. If you were going to make an axis that is around 60" long it would cost you about 1500 US after taxes and shipping. Around 3K for an 8 foot long x-axis (racks on both sides).
    Is is definitely out of my league. But, it's still interesting even if I can't afford it.





  5. #5
    Registered blurrycustoms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    133
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    Anybody else have any experience with this system? Seems pretty expensive.



  6. #6
    Gold Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2712
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    This is a bit off-subject but Nexen has other interesting products as well. I have no connection with Nexen, I'm not their promoter.

    Linear rail brakes, rotary brakes, the above roller gears among others.

    Neat stuff but I haven't used any yet.

    Dick Z

    DZASTR


  7. #7
    Registered
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    674
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    Is this new technology (as in last few years)? Seems like putting rollers on a pinion is something that engineers probably thought of decades ago. Does anyone else offer a roller pinion design?

    Regardless, it is a very cool system. Ballscrews are impractical for large routers on low to medium budgets. Companies like Thermwood require support arms to prevent whip. Komo uses helical R&P. Bridge mills use massive ballscrews that probably cost more than high end routers.

    Roller pinion... relatively inexpensive, easy to manufacture, lube-free. Pretty much the perfect linear drive system for woodworking IMO.



  8. #8
    Registered
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Roller Gear

    I know there is a very smiliar gear in use, since 1999, at a General motors plant which is in use to stamp quarter panels in a linear motion application. I'm not a liberty to cast judgement but Nexen's technology is very similar to what is used in the GM plant. Infrindgements on current patents? But to answer you question, yes there are others out there that have this technology.



  9. #9
    Registered
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    Joseph Ives used roller pinions in clocks. I'm not sure if the nexen rollers rotate on a shaft like Ives pinions did or not.



  10. #10
    Registered
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    573
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    It's the inverse of a chain and sprocket (imagine a short length of chain wrapped in a circle as the pinion and a linear 'sprocket')

    It would be interesting to experiment with a fixed chain laid flat (or held rigid in a U shaped channel, or even upside-down in a suitable T slot) with a sprocket on the motor. It could give similar performance to the roller pinion at a fraction of the cost.



  11. #11
    Gold Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2712
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    There were similar designs made a few years back b some guy named Leonardo DaVinci. He also mated the roller pinion against face gears. Clever fellow eh?

    Dick Z

    DZASTR


  12. #12
    Registered
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BillTodd View Post
    It's the inverse of a chain and sprocket (imagine a short length of chain wrapped in a circle as the pinion and a linear 'sprocket')

    It would be interesting to experiment with a fixed chain laid flat (or held rigid in a U shaped channel, or even upside-down in a suitable T slot) with a sprocket on the motor. It could give similar performance to the roller pinion at a fraction of the cost.
    Not exactly. If you use a chain sprocket curve then the line of motion of the of the drive pinion will not stay parallel to the line of motion of the rack. Say that three times fast. Here's what I mean:



    The sprocket profile looks more pointy than it really is. The export kind of lost something. The tooth profile is actually convex. Here's a better look:



    Note how the center line of the pinion follows a cycloidal path.

    The pinion is in rotation about its center axis and in translation; also; the pinion path and the line of motion along the rack must be parallel. With those constraints I simulated the motion of the pin through rotation and translation. The actual rack profile should look like this:



    Both profiles above used the same pinion configuration: 3/8" rollers, 10 rollers per pinion, 2PI length of travel per rotation.

    Compare the last profile with that used by Nexen:



    The Nexen profile is more triangular and less like a sprocket profile.

    Last edited by yamaha_r6m; 01-11-2009 at 07:47 PM.


  13. #13
    Registered
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    573
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yamaha-r6m
    Not exactly. If you use a chain sprocket curve then the line of motion of the of the drive pinion will not stay parallel to the line of motion of the rack. Say that three times fast. ...
    Yes you're quite right (although it had me scratching my head for a while to work out why).

    I had initial only considered the motion of the circular roller and semi-circular part of the sprocket (gum?) but, if one considers the motion of the tooth, then clearly, in the case of the roller pinion the tooth follows a straight path while a the tooth of a sprocket follows a curve (as you pointed out a cycloidal path).

    That then raises the questions;

    Is it possible to design a conventional sprocket that would operate as required (i.e. backlash free and accurate) on a linear chain?

    How many teeth would be required to maintain correct contact at all times? And, if this meant an unfeasibly large sprocket, would having two or more smaller sprockets suitably spaced along the chain, give you the desired control?



  14. #14
    Registered
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BillTodd View Post
    Yes you're quite right (although it had me scratching my head for a while to work out why).

    I had initial only considered the motion of the circular roller and semi-circular part of the sprocket (gum?) but, if one considers the motion of the tooth, then clearly, in the case of the roller pinion the tooth follows a straight path while a the tooth of a sprocket follows a curve (as you pointed out a cycloidal path).

    That then raises the questions;

    Is it possible to design a conventional sprocket that would operate as required (i.e. backlash free and accurate) on a linear chain?

    How many teeth would be required to maintain correct contact at all times? And, if this meant an unfeasibly large sprocket, would having two or more smaller sprockets suitably spaced along the chain, give you the desired control?
    Yes, it is possible. The tooth pattern would have to be a roulette (not exactly cycloidal due to the point of concern changing as the point of contact moves) though and not an arc (a sprocket tooth is just two arcs). I'd say 3 would be the minimum number of teeth, or maybe 4 teeth.

    You could use two sprockets on the same axil to take up the backlash if you can't get the profile perfect---similar to an anti-backlash gear setup.



  15. #15
    Registered
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    573
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    Yes, it is possible. The tooth pattern would have to be a roulette (not exactly cycloidal due to the point of concern changing as the point of contact moves) though and not an arc (a sprocket tooth is just two arcs). I'd say 3 would be the minimum number of teeth, or maybe 4 teeth.
    I was thinking about the number of teeth on the sprocket as a whole but I agree 3 or four teeth in contact should be plenty.

    Last edited by BillTodd; 01-12-2009 at 12:10 PM.
    Bill


  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1955
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    Yamaha_R6M - Thank you for that excellent explanation. I had not considered those details at all.

    Does this also hold true for a belt drive, such as an AT 5 or AT10 profile ? In other words, is the motion cyclic ?

    Thanks

    HarryN



  17. #17
    Registered
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by harryn View Post
    Yamaha_R6M - Thank you for that excellent explanation. I had not considered those details at all.

    Does this also hold true for a belt drive, such as an AT 5 or AT10 profile ? In other words, is the motion cyclic ?

    Thanks

    HarryN
    I'll go out on a limb and say yes this holds true for belts as well. The profile on a belt is designed to rotate a tooth around the axis of the pulley. The only places where the belt translates is between the pulleys and when the belt engages/disengages the pulley. When the belt engages/disengages the tooth of the belt doesn't stay parallel to the line of motion prior to engagement or after disengagement; however, this doesn't matter because the device that is being moved should be connected between the pulleys and the motion of the belt between the pulleys is always along the same path and the bulk movement "should" be the same between the pulleys for a given rotation. Now, belts sag in the middle and there is a difference in tension on either side of your device so the actual velocity of the device wont be linear for a constant pulley rotational velocity. The belt will sag in a catenary if the belt is allowed to sag. More accurate belt systems will slide the belt along a "level" surface (any material supported between two points will sag). Chain and belt systems are great if you want to transfer rotational motion between pulleys (like on a bicycle) or if you want to move something between the two pulleys or sprockets (your grocery store conveyor); however, the motion at the pulley/belt interface or the chain/sprocket interface is not smooth.

    If you try to roll a pulley on a flat belt then the pulley axis will follow a cycloid. The tooth profile must be altered to accommodate the rotation and translation of the pulley or roller pin or whatever you are using.



  18. #18
    Registered
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    6
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    wow im actually extremely disappointed i saw this product and im trying to design and put together a business plan for making my machine... but dang i cant afford the nexen like i truely wanted if its costs that much... and less then a ball screw is bull i was looking at around 800 fo r my whole machine at 7'x3' travel. Im extremely disappointed now...

    But now the question comes up... would it be possible to make your own roller and rack... having a machinest do it could you get it any cheaper then 800... is this even reasonable?



  19. #19
    Registered
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kylestrong87 View Post
    wow im actually extremely disappointed i saw this product and im trying to design and put together a business plan for making my machine... but dang i cant afford the nexen like i truely wanted if its costs that much... and less then a ball screw is bull i was looking at around 800 fo r my whole machine at 7'x3' travel. Im extremely disappointed now...

    But now the question comes up... would it be possible to make your own roller and rack... having a machinest do it could you get it any cheaper then 800... is this even reasonable?
    Would it be possible --- yes. For $800 --- probably not.

    You "might" be able to find someone to CNC something for you for less; however, you'd be hard pressed to do so. I recently had a 4500psi manifold machined out of 4340 and the cost for the one off prototype was just over $3500. My company paid that; I never would have. I've found shops locally that are slow and negotiated pretty good deals with the owners to have work done for me. I had a wells link plate, rods for said wells link, lower and upper control arms and new perches machined for my car last year for the cost of the material+the CNC operators hourly+10% to the owner. I found a shop that was slow and worked the deal out. All the above cam in less than $1000. $800? You'd be hard pressed IMO. It also depends on your area too.



  20. #20
    Registered
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    6
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    i was saying all that and now i remember my best friends father owns a business with laser cnc machines... and how much do you think material would cost... because i know he is really slow right now but i also know the machines cost alot of money to run lol so idk how that would work out but its a thought. i was looking at a rack and pinion setup with this one company and honestly it was rediculous what they quoted me... $750 for each split pinion for antibacklash i need for and then like $150 for every 1000mm of rack... is that not ridiculous?



Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


About CNCzone.com

    We are the largest and most active discussion forum for manufacturing industry. The site is 100% free to join and use, so join today!

Follow us on


Our Brands

Alternative to Ball Screw or Rack-n-Pinion

Alternative to Ball Screw or Rack-n-Pinion