General > General Technical Chat
Sharing some project planning phase: A (digital) ELECTRO-MECHANICAL Network
RJSV:
So:. Is this, actually, A LADDER NETWORK ?? (Without realizing it).
At this juncture, here are some problems, dealing with mechanical switching:
Stages need self-switching to transparent mode (after current stage, or station, does some local, custom rotary output session). One method involves a 'split-ganged' layout, having left and right sides. By having right side finish, with control having moved on, to next station, a signal to clear the current left-side can be sent 'backward' from, for example, station #17 backwards to clear the left side on station #16.
This way there can always be a clear path, for the chained signals (A, B, C) going through all stations #1 through and up to station #18.
RJSV:
...Actually, a more efficient method, for putting each station into transparent mode, has the signal looping back, but done right there in local station (switch box).
The signal to do this 'self cancel' after box has done, is simply the first signal after transparent mode has been put into place. That's going to be a 'SELECT' that is destined to pass through the following switch box, to act on the box 'twice removed' which is box #18 in the case of sending from box #16. It's a signal pipelined setup, sometimes hard to wrap mind around, as things involving timing often do.
The difficult part involves how to make such action only happen once (the first time). Otherwise that extra resistance will be present for everything, and from each station, along the serial line...
RJSV:
Another problem area, is when mixing two different signals: it's probably necessary to prevent 'BACKFEED' of an active signal, down a path that is (only) supposed to be one-way, from the other source.
There are various ways to deal with this. (In electronics that's called 'WIRED OR')
One partial solution involves using helix or worm-gear drives, as they cannot be driven from reverse direction, that is that while the rotary direction can be either way, CW or CCW, that rotary 'signal' can only go one way, through a worm gear. Plus, worm gear will hold position (of toggle lever, in this case).
RJSV:
A CHALLENGE.
So, NO, I haven't got it to work, yet, but have defined a couple problems to work on.
As to why design (current) using 'toggle' commutators, when final design might require some other form: The whole package is so new enough, as to be difficult to imagine, as a whole. Then, typically, many other aspects and problems, of design can be tackled. The substitution, later, of a helix worm gear, turns out to be relatively minor, so the whole project can progress forward
RJSV:
...also assessing problems with the toggling 'tip wheel' that will do selecting between one output wheel or other. Along with a detent action, is probably needed a bit of 'springy' force between the tip driver and the receptor wheel. Some use of very springy rubber (wheel) itself might be enough
Also, the direction of the tip drive wheel rotation probably affects the toggle lever-bracket so some testing needed to determine if there is a 'disengage' force to contend with.
My methodology, (perhaps a bit 'Drunken Warrior's method, lol), is to fabricate, best I can, cross fingers, try it, even with known questionable results. (Some backwards or unplanned signal paths are harmless dissapation effects. But keeping friction down is critical, when so many (10 to 30) units can be involved, in serial string.
Along those line, consider a switch box having 90% efficiency, (90 % of rotary force gets through). The percent declines, going down the series network, such that after about 10 stations, the rotary signal is diminished to about 10% or less, of original rotary signal coming from a BASE control unit (with regular motors).
Probably, even that is too optimistic...
But, I can find out these things, with relatively minor 'workshop' fabs. I certainly would not expect the 'usual' customer, for a KIT FORM product, to go to these lengths.
Mechanically speaking, I probably will get more skill, out of development, than any hypothetical customer.
THOMAS EDISON, I've heard, had a WHOLE CREW to go off, and build this / build that.
Makes me wonder; What stories would EDISON's lab staff have to tell ?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version