Timeline for Does gear diametral pitch have to be an integer? (teeth/diameter)
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 30, 2017 at 0:36 | comment | added | ddm-j | "by 0.1s and 0.2s" - is what metric gear diametral pitches are standardized by according to my textbook - Fundamentals of Machine Component Design. Similarly how the english system standardizes to integers | |
| Apr 30, 2017 at 0:30 | comment | added | ddm-j | alephzero - I'm simply wondering why standards are placed on the module, like the integer constraint. My reasoning is such: if we have a machine that can create parts within 4 decimal accuracy, a diametral pitch of 2 could actually look like 2.0000469273 because we do not know how accurate we are after the 4th place. With this reasoning, it would be similar to machine a part with PI as a diametral pitch, however we would have 3.1415 (measured) and could possibly have (in reality) 3.14150000002. I don't understand, thus, how irrational numbers (or long decimals) are not practically feasible. | |
| Apr 29, 2017 at 21:14 | comment | added | alephzero | "Non-integer" is not the same as "irrational". agentp already answered this in an earlier comment. (I have no idea what your reply about "according to 0.1 and 0.2s" meant.) Theoretically you could design gears with irrational diameters, but in real life you can't measure any irrational number exactly, so it's not a question about practical engineering. | |
| Apr 29, 2017 at 19:03 | comment | added | ddm-j | I'm concerned about the diametral pitch being a non-integer: number of teeth divided by diameter. Can this module, as you've said, be irrational? | |
| Apr 29, 2017 at 18:57 | history | answered | Chris Johns | CC BY-SA 3.0 |