![]() |
View
New Forum Topics Today's Forum Topics Set as homepage |
|
|||||||
Welcome to CyclingForums.com You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread. By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#31 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,498
|
Yep, that"s the one weakness, and that's why they use a fricton belt on CVT transmissions. Couldn't maintain a constant spacing between the ridges.
OTOH, the entire unit could be sealed. Some motorcycles have the chain entirely encased so it can run in an oil bath - no reason a lightweight enclosure couldn't be developed to keep water and mud off of the belt and cones. It wouldn't have to be entirely waterproof, just enough to deflect whatever was being splashed around. Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#32 | ||
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sweden
Posts: 848
|
Quote:
Years ago I was toying around with the idea of sort of a shaft drive worm gear, where you'd move the little cog closer or farther away from the circumference according to what ratio you wanted. I was really pleased with my line of thought until the impossibility of achieving a gradual increase in the number of cogs eventually dawned on me.... Quote:
That's an intriguing thought. I wonder where you'd end up size-wise though, if pedal and rear stay spacing would actually allow for such a design. And what are the forces involved, how much does it take to force the cones together? Any guess about what tension the belt runs at? |
||
|
|
|