MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => Off Topic => Topic started by: Ron on October 08, 2013, 11:36
-
a chain isnt powered by a ball bearing, as a ball bearing doesnt have teeth. Its physically impossible to power a chain with a ball bearing, unless welding is involved.
And cogwheels are not centered around a ball bearing either. Its impossible to power a cogwheel if its attached to the axle with a ball bearing. Unless you weld the balls to the outer two rings.
-
Friction?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friction)
-
Ball bearings are in fact reducing friction, mostly on purpose.
-
And?
-
A few people will exactly know what I am talking about ;)
-
A few people will exactly know what I am talking about ;)
Are your balls bearing?
-
Are you planning to have your balls welded on?
-
Isn't that the entire point of ball bearings?
You can't see through a 2" plate of steel either (not in the visible EM range anyway). Technically, that is "physics" too but I'm not sure how useful a concept it is to ponder.
-
Isn't that the entire point of ball bearings?
You can't see through a 2" plate of steel either (not in the visible EM range anyway). Technically, that is "physics" too but I'm not sure how useful a concept it is to ponder.
Frantically looking for page 1 of the thread ;D I haven't a breeze what this is about but ball bearings or cogs or anything related don't power anything - an energy source of some kind does that.
-
I couldnt find the right words to explain it. A motor powers a cogwheel and the chain transfers the power to another part of the machine. This can only be done with a cogwheel and a chain, it cant be done with a ball bearing and a chain, unless the chain is welded on the ball bearing.
I came to this thread because I got annoyed by someone saying his/her niche is too specialised for Shutterstock. I guess the niche is impossible physics.
-
Kinda wondering who decided your post deserved a minus ::)
-
The minus is because of course it can also be done with super glue.
-
Lol!
I don't know why this came up now. But I also have a theory that if you assemble a machine in such a way that where the cogwheels meet they have to turn in contrary directions, the machine is very likely to jam. If I remember correctly, it's easily achieved by having three cogwheels which each connect with the other two.
-
Kinda wondering who decided your post deserved a minus ::)
I decided the post deserved a minus. I consider this entire thread to be utter codswallop and the minus was for wasting my time clicking on it. If the OP has a statement to make or a question to ask then fine, go ahead and make it. However, couching this hypothetical nonsense in 'riddle speak' without explanation is both irritating and pointless.
-
Well, I got the meaning of the riddle on the post that got the minus. And, really, it was obviously going to be a bizarre post from the title.
So, if it's a total waste of time, why click on it again after awarding the minus?
-
I couldnt find the right words to explain it. A motor powers a cogwheel and the chain transfers the power to another part of the machine. This can only be done with a cogwheel and a chain, it cant be done with a ball bearing and a chain, unless the chain is welded on the ball bearing.
I came to this thread because I got annoyed by someone saying his/her niche is too specialised for Shutterstock. I guess the niche is impossible physics.
Actually if the chain were welded to the ball bearing, that wouldn't work either as you can't transmit torque through a ball bearing unless the balls themselves were rigidly attached to both the inner and outer races. But then it wouldn't be a ball bearing and, besides, the chain would only rotate until it got to the end of the weld at which point it would try to continue around the outer race, pulling backwards on the driven load, locking up the motor, likely causing it to overheat and fail in any of a number of possible failure modes.
-
Kinda wondering who decided your post deserved a minus ::)
I decided the post deserved a minus. I consider this entire thread to be utter codswallop and the minus was for wasting my time clicking on it. If the OP has a statement to make or a question to ask then fine, go ahead and make it. However, couching this hypothetical nonsense in 'riddle speak' without explanation is both irritating and pointless.
It's posted in off topic and the explanation is a few comments above yours. Try reading this forum without looking through the bottom of your whiskey glass for a change. Lol
You got upset because you dont get it? Hahahahaha
-
I couldnt find the right words to explain it. A motor powers a cogwheel and the chain transfers the power to another part of the machine. This can only be done with a cogwheel and a chain, it cant be done with a ball bearing and a chain, unless the chain is welded on the ball bearing.
I came to this thread because I got annoyed by someone saying his/her niche is too specialised for Shutterstock. I guess the niche is impossible physics.
Actually if the chain were welded to the ball bearing, that wouldn't work either as you can't transmit torque through a ball bearing unless the balls themselves were rigidly attached to both the inner and outer races. But then it wouldn't be a ball bearing and, besides, the chain would only rotate until it got to the end of the weld at which point it would try to continue around the outer race, pulling backwards on the driven load, locking up the motor, likely causing it to overheat and fail in any of a number of possible failure modes.
You are right, which means its even weirder to use a ball bearing with a chain set up.
-
Its physically impossible to power a chain with a ball bearing, unless welding is involved.
What if the ballbearing is highly magnetic? I mean, to a really crazy level of magnetic?
-
Its physically impossible to power a chain with a ball bearing, unless welding is involved.
What if the ballbearing is highly magnetic? I mean, to a really crazy level of magnetic?
Thats probably possible. Yeah, you are a great example of someone who thinks outside the box.
-
Box? You never mentioned a box, now I have to rethink the whole thing.
-
if the axle has grooves or divots in it where the ball bearings can fit then they can be used to move a chain. assuming there is enough tension on the chain to prevent the bearings from skipping over the grooves.
No welding required. Although it does raise the question of why use ball bearings and not just a cogwheel?
-
Great thread! :)
Please continue it is fascinating!
-
Just some of my basic thinking about the matter...
First its really interesting the problem uses ball bearing because its general purpose is in other way totally opposite so the better quality of ball bearing would make the problem harder to resolve.
So basically less friction - more difficult solution.
So we assume that the inner side of the ball bearing is somehow welded to axle which motor powers right ?
Inner side of ball bearing would rotate but outer side would stay still and would not power a possible chain around it ?
If thats the case first id don't see the problem so big in the part where the outer side of ball bearing and chain intersect but inside the ball bearing construction itself.
If not the case you could use some kind of rubber chain that would increase friction between itself and bearing and it could get going somehow...
So now lets get back on ball bearing construction...
U can basically rotate outer side in one direction and inner side in other in same moment...right ?
Now we come what Leo wrote...electromagnetism...
Here my knowledge is not so strong so somebody please correct me if Im wrong but if u power ball bearing itself with 2 different polarities inner and outer side u could get it going and u could transfer energy from it to other part by rubber chain with strong tension around outer side of the ball bearing.
So u have an axle that does it somehow from inner side and u transfer power from outer ring by rubber chain that could increase the friction and no welding would be needed.
If Im completely wrong just ignore me last time i was involved with practical physics was in elementary school :)
-
Although it does raise the question of why use ball bearings and not just a cogwheel?
Maybe Mr. Lagereek would like to chime in? :)
He is an expert on cogwheels and bearings.
Where has he gone? I kind of miss late night comedy shows with Mr. Lagereek...
-
Although it does raise the question of why use ball bearings and not just a cogwheel?
Maybe Mr. Lagereek would like to chime in? :)
He is an expert on cogwheels and bearings.
Where has he gone? I kind of miss late night comedy shows with Mr. Lagereek...
You just won the washer/dryer. :)
-
Although it does raise the question of why use ball bearings and not just a cogwheel?
Maybe Mr. Lagereek would like to chime in? :)
He is an expert on cogwheels and bearings.
Where has he gone? I kind of miss late night comedy shows with Mr. Lagereek...
LOL
-
I'd answer but I'm terribly busy trying to push a chain instead of pulling it.
Although it does raise the question of why use ball bearings and not just a cogwheel?
Maybe Mr. Lagereek would like to chime in? :)
He is an expert on cogwheels and bearings.
Where has he gone? I kind of miss late night comedy shows with Mr. Lagereek...