pantograph platform project

[Marco F inox]

I made a drawing in scale according to your measurements, speculating the 80 quota you did not indicate and that it is to check.
as seen from the leverages, the ab piston, is too close to the c and d points, so it must make a considerable effort, force that in most part discharges on the bearings, as I had already said.
the quota 159 and also decreased the quota 546.
It is necessary to approach as much as possible to two equal odds, taking into account that the piston shortens and therefore less will be its parade.
the piston is too long.

 

[Idealblok]

I repeat the pantograph always worked the only problem is the breaking of ball bearings
tomorrow I verify those 2 odds

 

[Idealblok]

here are the real quotas

 

[Marco F inox]

I made the drawing according to your last quotas, but it changes little and the problem persists.
more space between b and d.
If 135 does not disturb or above, it is necessary to decrease the 530 and the length of the piston.
If 135 decreases, the platform gets higher.
for the rest my other remarks apply.

 

[Idealblok]

regardless of everything we start from the first problem that type of bearing should be changed?
Since the piston that I closed is 1185 plus a race of 900 what changes I have to make ( considering that I have no space problems or above)?
What odds do I have to change?

 

[Marco F inox]

in this plant the bearings rotate only a quarter of turn, the piston load pushes in a narrow direction, work only a few balls, if we add that with a welded structure it is impossible to mount them aligned, it is easy to deem that the balls crush the crown and force the rings laterally creating the fracture.
I think you don't want to change the piston, because you say it works. but for me it will be hard to start the platform when it is vertical, perhaps with added load.
If you look well at the photos post 5 and 7, see that your quota 135 is reduced to the bone, to have more extension, while the fulcrum to is almost half the arm of 705, to facilitate the departure.
At this point I would put self-lubricating bushings instead of bearings, which you can also make of turning according to bearing sizes.

 

[Idealblok]

Thank you so much!! !
one last question, in addition to the change of bearings with self lubricating bushings
you can make me a design of how I should mount the piston (using always that)

 

[Marco F inox]

Yes, I will prepare you a maximum design, for the piston supports, which are equal. if given profile.
the photo you posted, rightly shows the support obtained on the cross, with the recess to allow the oscillation of the piston, in its extension of 900mm.

 

[TETRASTORE]

I would like to highlight the criticality of the mounting of the two steel wheels as the load is lateral, so always considering the reduced precision of a carpentry and deformations, in your case (a), the bearing does not work properly.
the b solution with wheels in vulkollan with bushings or integrated bearings mounted inside the tubular where the load is applied to the center of the wheel; you can leave the longer pin that runs inside the asola for security reasons.

 

[Marco F inox]

as I had reported in post 11, I would have put the u lying down with the wheel that flows inside, also because that asolate milling, leaves a strip of containment too thin and, the element that must avoid the tipping, is the wheel not the pin.
I prepared the drawings that you asked me according to your measurements, hypothesized a maximum angle of parade between contiguous elements of 90°.
I think a greater angle should be considered dangerous.
the piston starts from all closed to a parade of about 650mm, well below the maximum capacity of 900mm.
as the internal frame union cross, I used two tubes of the size of the 100x40 longherons.

 

[Idealblok]

therefore the quotas have remained unchanged
I just need to change the wheels and put bushings instead of bearings

 

[Marco F inox]

therefore the quotas have remained unchanged
I just need to change the wheels and put bushings instead of bearings

with such a long piston, you can do very little better, the observations I made.
But the drawings you asked me and what time do you have, don't you look at them?
you have come other observations... and advice.. .

 

[Idealblok]

ok that design is using the piston I already have;
Would you be able to make me another design by recommending a new piston?

 

[Marco F inox]

ok that design is using the piston I already have;
Would you be able to make me another design by recommending a new piston?

without haste because I also have commitments outside the house, but you should give me the measurements of the entire closed piston bushing, between 900 and 1000 mm, relative parade and diameter of the piston encumbrance, which you can find from the commercial.

 

[Idealblok]

I'm sorry I didn't want to rush you.
but with the same structure changing the piston attachment points I could tilt it more so as to increase the quota to and b of 175
more just she has time can recommend me which piston to buy and where to attach it always using the same structure

 

[Marco F inox]

Hello, good morning and let's say about you, we're here to help us solve problems.
the solution to tilt more the piston you have, it would increase even more the quota 185, which is already exaggerated and, the structure you have built, you can not and do not want it rightly to change.
the piston you have, with the total parade, would send you too high the shape, creating a great danger situation.
as required by you, I suggest you use a piston (or two), which has a total aperture of about 1700 mm.
to make the drawing, then I need precise interasses open and closed.