[Irinikus]

The model shown here doesn't really make any sense, but it's part of a trial and error learning process that I'm going through with this software:

[hamei]

The model shown here doesn't really make any sense, but it's part of a trial and error learning process that I'm going through with this software:

Made me laugh But it's good to enjoy yourself, yes ? The program is actually kinda fun, not the monster people claim.

Under Files -> Export you should find a bunch of options to save your assembly as another type of model - there's stl, if you want to do a 3d print, and maybe rib for rendering and definitely a bunch of others. Maybe you have a favorite program for better-quality rendering ? Lean your bearing up against a vase full of roses and do a three-week photorealistic render ?

Also you can take the model straight into Pro/mfg and write code to machine it or create a mold. Maybe do a compression cover for Raion, pick up a little nc machine to make the dies, then a benchtop injection molder and away ya go, thousands of compression caps. You could corner the world market

Oh. I hate to mention this but usually hybrid bearings are steel races with ceramic balls. The races like a little elasticity while the balls can be rigid as heck.

[Irinikus]

Thanks!

I just modified the race to make the bearing look far more realistic!




You can export it to an inventor file, so could you run it in the SGI demos?

[hamei]

You can export it to an inventor file, so could you run it in the SGI demos?

Yes you can. I've done that before to send things to people who have Irix but no Pro/E. Works good. You can spin them and twirl them and all that stuff. It's cool to be in the Irix in-crowd

Did you notice the checkerboarding in the lower half of your rendering ? I think the Pro/E rendering machine is not real real good. It's okay for giving a general idea but not what you'd call photo-realistic. Maybe that's why they have so many export formats, so people can make better advertisements in more artistic programs ?

One thing about exporting tho is, when you export it becomes a single sold thingy. Inside Pro/E you can edit anc change and modify but once you turn it into a dxf, for example, it's all one unified thing, can't modify it anymore.

That's probably obvious when you think about it, but a surprise the first time you do it.

You can also import from other formats, but the same thing applies. If you import an inventor (SGI-type, not autocad) file, it is what it is, no modifications can be made. For example, you can't import a dxf then add a chamfer or radius, it is what it is when you brought it in. Although you can import a dxf, say, into the sketcher and use that to create your feature, which can then be modified normally. If you have some simple stuff you made elsewhere, try importing it for fun. Then you might run into the size thing ... one thing I have run into there is, say you import from a program with no idea of size. The red rubber jacks ball you just dragged in may be as big as the sun ... or as small as a mouse poop

btw, you better fillet where those blades meet the base metal or your impeller will be cracking and flinging blades right through the housing. Embarrassing when you take out the fan shroud at 20,000 rpm Just open the first feature in your pattern, add the fillets, then badaboom, regen and she's all done. Spiffy, yes ?

btw ii, you're probably filling up your directory with trail files. They are numbered, so you can go back to any stage of the project that your want. But when you are satisfied with the models you can delete all the older ones to save some space. You can either do that manually or somewhere in there there's a graphical button, "delete previous versions."

You can also set up directories in your config.pro for all sorts of things - put all the textures in one directory, assemblies in another, trailfiles in another, your working directory someplace else, all kinds of stuff. You could, for instance, share your textures between several programs that way. If you can drag yourself away from drawing pictures for a minute, it's worth looking at the options in config.pro

[Irinikus]

After some more messing around and resizing, it's starting to look a bit more respectable!

[hamei]

After some more messing around and resizing, it's starting to look a bit more respectable!

You're having too much fun

Just two nits to pick ... you'll never get that bearing off the back side unless you put a little shoulder so the races don't press right up against the part. You've gotta at least misuse a screwdriver in there to pull the bearing off.

And go search images of 'spline shaft'. The teeth need either a relief at the end or an arcing runout. It's not possible to make them the way you have them drawn.

I'd stick a couple photos in here but ya know what ? now EVERYONE is pulling that asshole google trick, you don't get to find where the real image is, it's hidden behind their own worthless site-link. Jerks, jerks, jerks, I hate those bastards, every one of them. Bling, goofball, now even quackquackstay.

Can we have some demonstrations, please ? Burn down the damn world wide web ?

Looks good Are you going to build a turbo for your car ?

[Irinikus]

I originally tried to finish the ends of the spline teeth correctly, but it wouldn't allow me to remove the material, I need to mess around a bit more I guess!

The bearing on the back of the turbine is on a raised shoulder, just like the from one is.

[Irinikus]

I hope this is an improvement!

[Irinikus]

I decided to remove the shaft and bearing from the front of the turbine, and install two bearings to the coupling shaft:

[hamei]

I hope this is an improvement!

Of course ! but .... that's the trouble with mechanical design programs, instead of "wow that looks great !" you'll get "hey, where's the chamfer on that hole ? You'll break your taps trying to thread that thing !"

The trouble with your teeth is, those are involute splines. The sides are not straight, they are an involute curve. Also, where they pull out, they are produced by the relative motion between a straight-sided cutter roatating about its axis while traversing longitudinally and also tangentially. That curve is no simple thing to define. Mostly, the teeth on rendered drawings are wrong, which kinda drives gear guys nuts. Real gear shops don't draw the teeth, they model the blank and let the machine cut the teeth because they know there's no point to it.

There's a ton of "tutorials" on the net about drawing teeth and most of them are wrong. Don't listen to them.  I've seen a few, a very few, on sites like the actual PTC home where people have described the proper mathematical way to define involute teeth. But it's a lot more work.

In this case, if you wanted to go crazy and get more accurate, you could do two things.

One would be to use straight-sided splines, for example a 1" six-spline.  Search images under that description, the o.d. in that case is 1". They come in many different standards, choose the one you like. The pullout at the end of the spline is still a tricky curve but the spline itself is simple.

Another would be to use 30 or 45* serrations. Those are similar to involute splines but have straight sides, at either a 30 or 45 degree angle. 30 would be more suitable. Like splines, they are normally cut in standard sizes ... DP is the best system, module sucks. In the Diametral Pitch method, there are x number of teeth per inch of pitch diameter. The pitch diameter is about in the middle of the teeth, where the two pitch circles of mating gears would be tangent. On this size shaft the standard sizes would be maybe 12 (a little big), 16 (what I'd probaly use), 24 or 32 (too small). In DP, the pitch diameter is the middle of the surface that is doing the pushing, and the outside diameter equals the pitch diameter plus two teeth.  So if your pd is 1" and you are using 16 DP, then the outside diameter is equal to the pitch diameter of 18 teeth. It's easier than it sounds

With a 1" pitch diameter, the od would then be the pd of 18 teeth which equals 1.125"  If you want to get a 1" o.d., then go backwards, use 14 teeth, then the 16 tooth od divided by the 16 dp - 1"

With gears and splines you are really working with the pitch diameters, not the od. That's why the DP system is easier to use in gear design. Seems counterintuitive but when you realize what's important, it's not.

When they invented metric splines they just translated dp splines into millimeters so it works from height of the tooth, not how many fit on a pitch circle. It's backwards, an abortion, I despise metric "module", for actual gear calculations it is terrible, but that's what people have learned in the past twenty years so you will see more references to that than DP.  Up to you but in my mind, a confirmation of the prophesies of Idiocracy. (I'd vote for Terry Crews in a heartbeat, want a good laugh ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGUNPMPrxvA

Laughing hysterically ... hard to believe how accurate this is. Except President Camacho has class

Go for it

Don't you need a snap ring on the outside edge of those bearings, so the rotor doesn't move around longitudinally ?