But Does My Automatic LEGO CVT Actually Work?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 12 окт 2024
- In my last video, I worked on creating an automatic continuously variable transmission, which could automatically vary it's gear ratio when I applied more resistance to the output, to increase the output torque while decreasing the output speed.
However, while the decrease in output speed was clear to see, I wanted a way to show the increase in output torque, as that was the whole purpose of the automatic transmission. In order to do this, I had to design a machine to measure this output torque. After testing out several different designs, I managed to create a highly accurate torque measurer mechanism, which allowed me to show that the automatic transmission indeed works as it should, and provides more torque under higher loads, without requiring any extra torque from its input. I was really happy with how this torque measurer turned out, and I'm sure I'll be able to use it to test out lots of my future creations. Enjoy the video!
Oh yes, the magic of making two of them has been unleashed
Technology connections mentioned
@@Brunon-bj1hx which video of his does he say that? from the quote I'm already interested
@@josephnichols7419 It was an ongoing thing for a while, but I don't think he's said it recently. One that I know has it was his video on the "Klaxon" (i.e. that horn thing that makes the awoooooga sound).
@@josephnichols7419Many videos, usually it’s a video about a smaller electronic device that he can feasibly take apart
Like every video, one that comes to mind was the back up alarm one, it’s a great channel
Your lego cvt functions better than just about every early 2010s cvt in cars
Bro ur one of the best lego technic builders i’ve ever seen, its insane to see u do this. Im looking forward for the next vid with the car!
Thank you, I really appreciate that!
Auto manufacturers be like:
“How come his belt isn’t slipping?”
Fellow human, amazing work!!
That’s mind blowing. And I’ve seen a lot of Lego videos!
A++++
Subscribed
Thank you, I'm glad you liked it!
When I first learned about CVTs, my immediate thought was an iris style like this one vs the v-belt used in the auto industry. I never got to prototype it but made drawings, I need to find those. I’m so happy to see how well yours is working and feel very validated. My idea could either have a counterweight actuation to automatically adjust it in reaction to torque like this or a manual one to take advantage of a torquey motor for more speed. I think the use of springs (rubber bands) makes more sense in a transmission where you normally want to reduce rotating mass.
This project/video is downloaded and saved. Top 10 on RUclips for me personally!!!
Thanks, I'm really glad you liked it, and it's cool to hear that someone else had the same idea!
Fantastic! I love the way you calibrated the torque measurer, simple, yet extremely effective and reliable! These videos show your amazing ingenuity with Lego! :D
Thank you very much, I'm glad you liked it!
Regarding CVTs you are the only one competent enough to be head to head with Lego Technic Mastery. Sad to see, that he is gone for such a long time. But now we have you! And your vids are very refreshing. Keep on with your work, you‘re doing good💪
Will these torque measuring systems be included on the cars? I think it might be interesting to see them function as some form of gauges that would be seen on a real car, but they are pretty big. Impressive solution, I am excited to see it further!
No, that would cause horrible torque steer. Plus it does was torque regardless of the claim. He just doesn't notice it.
Yeah, you're right that they're pretty big, so I don't think they would fit on the car. Though after seeing in this video how the torque values on the input and output change as the gear ratio changes, I think it'll be pretty easy to infer what the torques are like on the car by seeing how the CVT's gear ratio changes.
@@SlyNineThere's a little bit of power lost to friction in all the gearing up to the differential, and the input torque consequently needs to be a little higher. In steady state, that's the only thing that requires additional torque.
When the dial is *moving*, there's a little more friction loss from the dial itself, and the rubber band is either storing or releasing energy. Luckily, only steady state measurements are needed.
Great video! loved the in depth explanation of torque measurements. However, I think the reason for the losses in the first device are different from what you explained in the video. Since for a fixed torque the rubber band reaches a steady state, we can expect the same amount of loss from replacing it with a fixed length linkage. This would mean that the entire outer body of the differential is fixed, and the torque loss is coming from inefficiencies in the small bevel gears inside, which would make sense. This is an important distinction because it shows a fundamental principle of how work works (pun intended). Friction is force over a distance so it can take energy out of a system, but a rubber band that is at a fixed length can not consume energy since the force is not acting over a distance
Thats excactly what puzzled me. I don't think the rubber band is stealing torque. In a steady state, once it's stretched it can't be absorbing torque. Otherwise, where is the energy going? Sure there's more loss because the torque has to travel in a less efficient way. But in a no friction perfect world, the principle remains the same, you're basically holding the torque with a spring and measuring the deflection, it's just that the axle one is way more elegant and less intrusive. His example with the car is also flawed, the way he represented his first mechanism as a second weight isn't true, the rubber band should be fixed to a stationnary object. In fact, the whole idea of losing torque in his mechanism makes no sense in term of work, the motor is directly connected to the gear and the only thing resiting its torque is the chain, reverse from the output perspective.
I thought a lot about this while I was making the video, so I'm glad someone's brought it up, and you could be right that the additional losses are going to the gears inside the differential - I'm honestly not sure. Considering the conservation of energy as you mentioned, the way it made sense to me using my explanation is that, once the rubber band stretches it's exerting an equal force on the differential housing, which corresponds to a higher torque felt by the input. So even if the rubber band isn't being stretched any further, the input is turning the same distance against a higher torque, so more energy is needed, meaning this extra energy is being wasted... somewhere, since the output still has the same speed and torque as before. I thought that somehow this extra energy must be being wasted by the rubber band, but I understand that if it's not streching any further it's not storing any extra energy. Maybe it's rapidly stretching back and forth slightly as I turn the input to dissipate the extra energy, I'm honestly not sure.
@@BananaGearStudios Your reasoning is *almost* correct, but fails to consider that the torque of the gearing in the differential doesn't add up like that. Actually, due to how the gears work, the torque of all three diff. outputs should always be equal, or at least proportional. You can see this when you let the diff. housing spin freely - then there is no way for you to have any torque on the output shaft no matter the input shaft torque, because it'll just make the housing spin. With your initial reasoning, "no torque on the housing" *should* mean "all torque goes to the output shaft", which clearly isn't true.
Thinking in terms of "conservation of energy" is extremely useful here. Ben is 100% correct in saying that you could replace the rubber band with a stiff linkage in the steady state, which *can not* consume energy, ergo it can't cause losses. The way the gears in the diff. are set up that the output will just feel the input torque, minus friction on the small gears inside.
In the first torque measuring device, energy is lost in making the white slip gear slip, as this acts as a sink for the torque to drain into - converting kinetic energy to heat
@geoffdavids7647 That's not correct. The white gear is connected to the output and is therefore acting as the "load" - we want that to be dissipating energy. The whole purpose of using that gear is to show that additional energy is being lost in the mechanism, not just to that gear.
you know you filled in the nieche that I so badly needed on my you tube, may thank and well done!
Thanks, glad to hear it!
That amount of effort put into a video isn’t seen anywhere on youtube. 100% engineering, 100% science included. No cheap grabbing attention for views. Thank you for the amazing content!
Thank you, I really appreciate that!
If you're making two of them anyway, can you test how well one per wheel would work in place of a differential?
now thats a dope idea!
Assuming you're refering to coupling two CVTs together, I suppose I could. But then you're not getting the benefit of coupling them, being the higher range of gear ratios, but it'd still take up twice the space of just having one.
@@BananaGearStudios Im thinking of how a differential works, instead of using it, in place your using two cvts for each wheel, now connecting both cvts to a power input drive chain, or instead you can put a third one in as a power train. so if say D is representing a wheel, and Y is representing the shape of the cvt jointed together. it look like DYD kinda shape, at the Y is where they junction together. I think it could be a slip differential. I still think it would be a cool idea. Sorry I would honestly draw it but dont have ability to submit a drawing.
DAF used this in the earliest passenger cars they made in the 50's and 60's, called variometic. They later switched to a single cvt with a differential due to tyre wear and reliability problems.
Absolutely brilliant! Your explanations are so clear and concise. I feel like I really learned a lot about torque and how it’s measured from watching this video. I’ve seen a lot of people’s Lego automatic gearbox designs, but I’ve never seen anyone prove that it really works with actual math and physics. So much more impressive than the simple hill climb tests commonly found on RUclips.
Thank you, that's great to hear!
They one of if not the greatest lego mechanisms i've seen so far.
This was so satisfying, because it took me years to understand and how to explain torque, and this was measured exactly as I hoped.
Great video!
wow this is honestly so cool that you made this using just lego, massive props to you for even coming up with these cool ideas
Thank you, that's nice to hear!
You make cvts really understandable. I just wish they worked as good as that one. I'm already excited to watch it in a car.
Verry nice step by step explanation of how to engineer a measurement device!
Thanks!
really beautiful video, i love how you present your concepts, your simple and clean video style are like a canvas for interpretations and perspectives and i can certainly see where others an me place thoughts where you left place for us to do so :D
That's a beautiful description, thank you, that means a lot to hear!
The whole video I wanted you to couple them in series I'm glad you already planned that!
The torque measurement is off I believe. The scale is not perpendicular to the arm pressing on it. The arm you used has two parts with a right angle, but could have been replaced by a single arm without an angle. In that case the way pressure is applied is equivalent, but you could clearly see that the arm is not perpendicular. Never the less, super interesting and nice video!
im just answering from intuition now, but i think when the arm is horizontal at 90° its pushing straight down (only vertical force) but when the arm is angled at 120° as if you would connect the axle to the point of contact with the scale there would be vertical and horizontal components to the force of which only the vertical would be detected by the scale. any other force vector except the one pulling straight up produces a horizontal component, so the arm going straight down after the right angle is just an extension of the only possible force vector thats normal to the ground (parallel with gravity) where 100% of the force can be measured
Agreed. But the error is only like 1 or 2 studs on a 12-stud long arm, though.
And all displayed values are off by the same constant factor.
[Rectified]
@@lf7911 You are probably American (or Brit) then, where there's Pounds and Pound force in the unit system.
If you're living in the remaining 90% of the world, then the scales give the weight (which yes, is technically a force) already "conveniently" converted into mass. And in order to get the force back, you have to do the reverse conversion.
(Banana Gear Studios appears to be from outside "imperial unit country", judging from the fact that he measures the arm in centimeters and the torque in newton meters.)
But even if his conversion was wrong, the values would all still be off by the same factor, meaning that the conclusions still hold.
@lf7911 No, the weighing scale, while measuring the force, is displaying the weight as a mass, as shown by the units being grams. So therefore I multiplied this by g to find the weight, and then this by the horizontal arm length to find the moment - none of the calculations are wrong.
I'll be there for the car !
Brilliant engineering
Terrible math
Thanks!
Very good explanations and an awesome project! Looking forward to you putting it in a car. Keep up the good work man!
Thank you!
So happy to see more content about this one, thanks!
this is a banger, can't wait for the car build
just the toque testing was great
This is a really really nice video.
Well done!!
Great demonstration, and very well explained!
This is such a cool demonstration! Great job designing and explaining everything
Thank you!
usually when videos say they aren't including smth in them, i get kinda disappointed, but im not for this because this is so interesting and i want to keep being interested in this. I NEED MORE VIDEOS! I DEMAND MORE BRAIN TICKLING INFORMATION! I DEMAND IT AT ONCE!
you also talk very nicely and i love it
Haha thanks, I'm glad you liked it!
@@BananaGearStudios yeah dude! you explain it all very well and it's very easy to understand what you're doing, even in the more complicated videos!
Was waiting for an application video of the cvt
This was posted 2 hours after I watched the first one, nice timing. Great and interesting video, keep it up.
Thanks, glad you enjoyed it!
Really cool 😎. I’m curious though, does the non round shape of the sprocket/pulley? not make it pull unevenly?
Just a question I’m sure you know more about this than I do.
It probably means the speed varies a bit, yes, and this might be why the dials on the torque measurers shake up and down a bit when they're connected, but it doesn't see to be too big of an issue.
Cool cvt, and even cooler torque meter. Would be cool if you build a centrifugal rpm meter and then a multiplier mechanism so you can measure power
Wow that's insane! Keep up with this amazing videos!
Thank you!
I've watched multiple of your videos and they're all really cool! Can't wait for you to test it in a real car! You've definitely earned my sub
Thank you, I really appreciate that!
Need this on a bike. Carbon fiber (or steel?) torsion bars or leaf springs in place of the bands, and I think you have a seriously cool item.
God this is such a good channel
Thanks!
Good job. Now patent it and develop one for large engines. If this idea scales up nicely you'll have solved the biggest problem with CVTs. Limited power throughput before the belts slip. The mechanical load based shifting is less complicated and more robust than most systems that would measure RPM and use hydraulics to change the pulley ratio.
Would be really interrestng to see the torque meassured while the car goes up hill, with and without load!
Really cool transmission, really fun to watch!
That's a nice idea! Though it would be a bit challenging to fit one of these torque measurers on the car.
I said it once, and ill say it again, a chain driver cvt irl in a actual car is gonna be insane.
Amazing Work!
Fantastic video; well done!
Thank you!
bro youre a genius
You're not "wasting torque" to stretch the rubber band, you're wasting torque grinding bevel gears together.
Once the band in stretched, the machine isn't doing any work to keep it stretched. Work is force times distance, and at steady state the torque arm is not moving.
The reason the second design works better is because you're not putting any real torque through the bevel gears, so you avoid a lot of the friction. The axle twisting is performing the same function as the band did in the first design, it is acting as a spring, converting a force to a displacement.
I thought a lot about this while I was making the video, and you could be right that the additional losses are going to the gears inside the differential - I'm honestly not sure. Considering the conservation of energy as you mentioned, the way it made sense to me using my explanation is that, once the rubber band stretches it's exerting an equal force on the differential housing, which corresponds to a higher torque felt by the input. So even if the rubber band isn't being stretched any further, the input is turning the same distance against a higher torque, so more energy is needed, meaning this extra energy is being wasted... somewhere, since the output still has the same speed and torque as before. I thought that somehow this extra energy must be being wasted by the rubber band, but I understand that if it's not streching any further it's not storing any extra energy. Maybe it's rapidly stretching back and forth slightly as I turn the input to dissipate the extra energy, I'm not sure. Though I really doubt that all of that torque is being wasted by the differential gears - I've used those differentials for all kinds of machines in the past and they waste almost no torque.
@@BananaGearStudiosyou should be able to easily test that by locking the differential body in place and repeating the measurement.
This isn't about work though, it's about force. The force continuously exerted by the rubber band opposes the torque generated by the motor, canceling out some of what would otherwise be seen at the output.
@@BananaGearStudios that particular lego differential struggles in this application because the single bevel gear causes the axles to be radially loaded, pressing them up against the side of the case.
The lego differentials with two or three floating bevel gears do not have this problem.
It only really becomes an issue when the difference in angular velocity between the case and the axles is significant.
@@nonnymoose7005 the best way I can explain this is that, at steady state, the arm is not moving and the system behaves the same way it would if you locked the differential case in place.
It is acting as nothing more than a gearbox, albeit an efficient one due to the shortcomings of the differential used.
I can assure you, no torque is lost in that band. It exerts just as much force on the arm as the arm does on it.
This could have been so much easier. You didnt realize the cvt in itself could already function as a torque measurer.
If you had fixed the cvt input, and did the trick with the scale on the output, the torque would be measured by the extension of the cvt "arms". So you could have just measured which torque corresponds to which "shape" of the cvt belt directly.
Now you just added a lot of parasitic torque losses with a whole additional mechanism, making the measurements unreliable in the process
I'm afraid none of that is correct. The torque measurers waste almost no torque, as shown by the final tests. And the CVT needs to be rotating to effectively change size, so measuring its torque statically won't work.
The torque measuring device you made can also be used to measure higher forces by adding more bands which I thought was cool😃😃
Thanks for noticing that! I actually originally intended to use multiple bands, but it turned out that in this case just one per section was enough.
Awesome enginieering
Thanks!
I need this for my 2011 Dodge Caliber
You need to preload the rubberband model by wrapping some bands in opposite directions from each other
If you had a dc motor that you provided your own power supply, you could use the current going to the motor as a proxy!
The second design is still a great achievement, but is doesn't work better for the reasons you claim (Tl;Dr: It's actually all because the LEGO differential has massive friction issues):
A: 1:23 If there is torque lost in the mechanism, then it's due to the friction between the gears. The rubber band would only store torque (or rather energy), it would use some torque for a second or less to get stretched, and then it would supply the torque (or energy) to the output shaft once it can contract again.
B: 1:40 The fact that the output slips with one clutch on the input but slips with two clutches on the output only means that the torque ratio is closer to 2:1 than to 1:1. I really wouldn't call that a way to _measure_ how much torque is lost, beyond this rough estimate. (You have no way of knowing that it's "exactly half", as you state at 2:02.) Not least because you also apply the torque in a "pulsed" manner if you hand-crank the input shaft, and the clutch gears slip at peak torque.
B.2: If you really wanted to _measure_ how much torque is lost in the/an device, then the only way to do that would be to attach a torque-measuring device to its input and output. 14:25 It looks like the friction in the "first device" is closer to 2/3rds than to 1/2.
C: 2:14 "meaning we'd only have a quarter [torque] left to actually power anything with". You only have to pay the torque price while measuring it, though. The only real problem would be that you can't get the full amount of torque that the motor provides into your CVT, and thus can't measure it's performance in the highest torque range.
D: 6:11 There is (theoretically) no difference between the rubber bands being stretched in either case. The only _real_ advantage of the second design is that you eliminate almost all of the friction inside the differential. The gears inside the differential _are_ still spinning against each other when the axle spins (as in the first design), but the dial pointer and associated gears do not put any force against the differential housing (in contrast to the spring-loaded pointer in the first design).
E: 8:13 That would be the analogy if there was no differential in the first device, but an arm that is directly connected to the input/output shaft.
I was suspicious that that "half the torque is lost in the device" result was way too high, but apparently the LEGO differentials are just really not made to work with torque on all 3 sides while the little gears are spinning against each other. Which admittedly they don't have to when used in a car's drive train.
I do have to congratulate you on stumbling across the correct solution to your problem without understanding it correctly. I'm pretty sure that I would have struggled to find a way to not spring-load the pointer side of the differential, even _if_ I knew that that's the source of the lost torque. And without seeing _both_ designs I may never even have believed that it's indeed coming from the differential.
I'm sorry but most of this comment is incorrect and the video was correct.
@@jerth Well, there's an easy way to test it: Build the first mechanism, but without the arm and rubber band. Just connect the differential housing to a fixed gear (or rack). If the video is correct, and the rubber band stretching (and needing to be held stretched), then the "simple differential" wouldn't reduce the torque at all.
If I'm correct and the differentials just have massive amounts of friction in them when loaded, then you'd see the same results as with the arm and rubber band present.
@@jerthhe's correct. Plus it's obvious unless you think he's magically getting work for free.
I thought a lot about this while I was making the video, and you might be right that the additional losses are going to the gears inside the differential - I'm honestly not sure. Considering the conservation of energy as you mentioned, the way it made sense to me using my explanation is that, once the rubber band stretches it's exerting an equal force on the differential housing, which corresponds to a higher torque felt by the input. So even if the rubber band isn't being stretched any further, the input is turning the same distance against a higher torque, so more energy is needed, meaning this extra energy is being wasted... somewhere, since the output still has the same speed and torque as before. I thought that somehow this extra energy must be being wasted by the rubber band, but I understand that if it's not streching any further it's not storing any extra energy. Maybe it's rapidly stretching back and forth slightly as I turn the input to dissipate the extra energy, I'm honestly not sure.
And regarding B.2, yes, I wasn't sure that it's exactly half the torque that is lost, that's why I didn't end up using that mechanism to measure the torque like that. I just mentioned that to explain that it isn't a practical design even if we do know how much torque is wasted.
D. I disagree. Try driving any mechanism through a differential and you'll see that at most only a small fraction of the torque is lost to it - they're not that lossy at all. As I explained above, I still believe my explanation could be correct, but even if it's not, I don't believe that so much torque is being lost just to the differential gears.
this is awesome
This is crazy
I cant believe you baited us with the alleged car testing 😭
:) When I filmed the first part I honestly thought I was going to get to the car in this video.
Really neat
6:49 say that again?
🤯
MEASURING WITH LEGO WTHHHH!!! LEGO BETTER REACH OUT BRUV
DAF Variomatic moment
great work!
Thank you! I see you on all my videos, so I just wanted to say thanks for the support!
@@BananaGearStudios haha always here for the lego technic builders! not many of us XD I've been moving to more electrical side of things eg custom motors or motor controllers etc... :D
🗣️🔥
"Wasting torque" sounds weird. You could waste energy (when stretching the elastic), but one cannot "waste torque". Once the elastic is stretched, it should not make much difference. The friction will probably increase when there is stress on the gears, maybe that is what you experienced?
very good video👍🏿
Thanks!
Shouldn't the arm pushing down on the scales, be perfectly up and down. Like 90 degrees to the scales?
Absolutely fantastic! Donating this comment to the algorithm so i can see more!
Has this method ever been used in any commercial machinery?
i think that a lego clutch gear is 2.5 ncm so you couldve used multiple of them to calibrate the scale
I did think about that, but it would've been a lot less precise than what I ended up doing. Still though, it's a nice idea!
Can you make this simpler and smaller
Now power the cvt with a pneumatic v8 lego engine and put it into a truck and haul something big up a hill 💦💦💦💦
Awesome
Could you make a video on how differencial works and why you use them in every single one of your videos ? Because I don't get it. I see it is something very useful but at the moment you say "I used a differencial" I loose track of the explaining.
Differentials aren't a Lego only thing. They're commonly used in the real world, for example, in cars. Because of this, you don't need to wait for him to make a video; you can just search, "How do differentials work?" on RUclips and watch some explanation videos. You could also read up on it.
@@Xodabeef yes that is what I did. But I couldn't find any other use that car turning.
Thanks for the comment. To be honest I'm not sure if it's worth making a full video on them. I'm sorry I don't explain them in much detail, but for anyone who already understands them I don't really want to slow down the pace of the videos. The best TL;DR explanation I can give is that the differential housing essentially adds the torque of the two inputs, while averaging their speed.
How I've used it in this video to measure the twist of the axle is that, since it's averaging the speeds of the inputs, say a and b, the speed of the housing, c, is (a + b)/2. But if b is rotating in the opposite direction to a, it looks like c = (a - b)/2, or 2c = a - b, so the differential housing is showing us the difference in the speeds of the inputs, or in this case the difference in how far each end of the axle has turned. Hope this helps.
@BananaGearStudios Ok I get why it isn't worth a full video. But I'm just very intresed in it since I see that it has much more uses that making cars able to turn. Also yes your explaining helps me a little bit more.
Can you make a written paper about the theory of how it works with the calculations pls
I did not know for certain that the scale gave the measure in direct mass units
Nothing looks wrong to me. Can you explain what's wrong?
@@BananaGearStudios Apparently your scale gives you direct data in mass, if this is the case, then there is no error
So goood
magic man. while you are at it. a rpm meter? so we can get the horse power it produces
Thanks! I have made a speed measurer in a previous video, though it's probably more complex than you were thinking...
11:45 are you sure the input and output are running at the same speed? Pausing the video, playing it and then pausing the video and then comparing makes it seem like they are running at different speeds.
for instance, i paused the video at a perfect time, and the input + output (yellow + red) were pointing in the same direction, but playing the video for half a second and pausing again revealed that the input and output were no longer pointing in the same direction
Yes, I did say roughly the same speed. It's not perfect, I'd say the gear ratio ended up being something like 1.1:1 rather than 1:1, as there wasn't a simple combination of gears that got the speeds perfectly equal, but it was close enough for what I wanted to show in the video.
If it's just to test it and form factor is not an issue, you can have the exact same ratio by putting another chain with fixed mechanism instead of rubber band in place of the gear ratio.
Put one of those resistence gaers white outside area and grey where the axle goes thath one and hold it
Your criticism of the first mechanism isn't actually valid. The tests you did only prove their own invalidity.
The first mechanism works if you look at it in terms of conservation of energy.
The band only absorbs energy when moving, so the only thing that can be wasting energy is the gearing, which isn't very wasteful really.
Your tests are wrong because while the band is changing positions, the torque is wasted, but once a stable state is reached, it all works out.
The apparent loss of energy with the two to one case is made up for by the output spinning quickly when it does.
Edit:
Wellllll, I guess the last experiment prooves me wrong, but... I dont know why. Power in a moving shaft is angular velocity * torque.
Since torque drops, but angular velocity doesnt, the power must be going somewhere. Holding a rubber band taught does not take energy (it takes force, not energy, proof: you can hold a rubber band taught by wrapping it around something).
Losing the extra torque must be a plain ineficiency somewhere... Maybe the little differential isnt very good with uneven loads?
Or like, physics works differently for lego.
I liked the video, but I feel like you over-explained some of the more obvious things a bit
One other way to think about the difference between the first (bad) system for measuring torque and the good one, is that the bad one measures torque by applying a torque proportional to the output torque, whereas the second system only measures the angular displacement of a shaft experiencing a torque and therefore does not apply any torque itself.
It still uses some non-zero amount of torque to rotate the dial and twist the shaft, but if the output torque is constant, then it will not use any torque.
Don't know how to break it to you. But that is indeed wasting torque.
Probably. Nothing mechanical is free considering friction. Still much much less than the alternatives 😊
Of course there is a very small amount of torque used to move the position of the dial, but this is extremely small. When I tested the fixed transmission between the torque measurers, you can see that both dials go up equally - this shows that the torque resisting the output is equal to the torque being applied to the input, meaning none is wasted in between by the measurers.
mechanical capacitor
I got a good idea for ya, explain how it works then explain it with an example dumb people like me understand.
Why are you making lego videos and not working for NASA
Because he thinks he's getting work for free and there's no loss in torque. He's not, and there is.
@SlyNine That's simply not correct. Of course there are very small frictional losses to drive the dial, so of course there is more resistance when the CVT is connected through the torque measurer versus nothing being connected. But when the torque measurers on the input and output both show roughly the same torque, it clearly shows that the torque measurer (in that case the output torque measurer) isn't wasting any significant amount of the input torque.
Amazing content!