[NSRCA-discussion] Direct Servo Drive

[Grow Pattern]

Dean,
           What snow?

It's only a 12" dusting.....Signed, ex Boston MA inmate....

You should just "get a room" for yourself and the "tuned-pipe-pundits", then talk 2-c's and pipes until the snow melts! That will keep you all sane!  :-)))) John's RV is vacant right now.....

Evl-Eric.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Dean Pappas 
  To: NSRCA Mailing List 
  Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 1:39 PM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Direct Servo Drive


  Yeah, John!
  What ever happened to the "obvious to one skilled in the art" clause? 
  Maybe what is patented is the arrangement of servo-box, or extension arm ... in any case, this falls under the heading of re-patenting the wheel.
  Granted, on a 3-D only setup, I'd hook up to the servo this way!

  signed, snow covered in Joisey
  A.K.A.
  Dean Pappas 
  Sr. Design Engineer 
  Kodeos Communications 
  111 Corporate Blvd. 
  South Plainfield, N.J. 07080 
  (908) 222-7817 phone 
  (908) 222-2392 fax 
  d.pappas at kodeos.com 
    -----Original Message-----
    From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of John Ferrell
    Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 1:30 PM
    To: NSRCA Mailing List
    Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Direct Servo Drive


    If that can be worthy of a patent, the inmates are in charge of the asylum!

    John Ferrell    
    http://DixieNC.US

      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Bob Richards 
      To: NSRCA Mailing List 
      Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 9:08 AM
      Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Direct Servo Drive


      My feeling exactly.

      Bob R.


      Ed Alt <ed_alt at hotmail.com> wrote:
        Never have seen it before, but I guess the main question I have concerns the potential for loss of effective torque transmitted to the control surface.  I see that they claim it's better due to no losses.  That would be true in the sense that you don't lose that little bit in the linkage friction etc., but if you only want, say, 25 degrees of surface throw each direction, it would appear that you would have to limit the servo travel to 25 degrees as well.  If that's true, then you have less mechanical advantage for a given degree of movement for the surface, since you would normally have a servo traveling about doub! le that distance.  The control surface speed would be quicker, assuming the load is handled without any blowback or slowdown of movement due to the effectively lower torque transmitted while moving.  Maybe I'm not seeing it right, but it looks like it might not be such a good thing to use, unless you were already planning on having something close to a 1:1 correspondence of degrees of servo arm movement to degrees of surface travel.

        Ed



--------------------------------------------------------------------------


      _______________________________________________
      NSRCA-discussion mailing list
      NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
      http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  NSRCA-discussion mailing list
  NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
  http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20060213/4f5769c7/attachment-0001.html