/robowaifu/ - DIY Robot Wives

Advancing robotics to a point where anime catgrill meidos in tiny miniskirts are a reality.

Server and LynxChan upgrade done. Canary update and a general address soon. -r

Max message length: 6144

Drag files to upload or
click here to select them

Maximum 5 files / Maximum size: 20.00 MB


(used to delete files and postings)

/agdg/ 's Game Jam runs from 3/3 to 4/4 ! Join now and learn2code during this special month, Anon! :DD

Open file (93.53 KB 800x540 TypesOfMotors.jpg)
Open file (436.87 KB 1664x2048 MotionBaseServos.jpeg)
Open file (78.13 KB 922x1396 Femisapien.jpg)
Open file (2.25 MB 2500x1778 MechaMadoka.jpg)
Actuators For Waifu Movement Part 3 Kiwi 12/06/2023 (Wed) 01:18:16 No.27021
(1stl thread >>406 2nd thread >>12810) Kiwi back again with a thread for discussing actuators to move your waifu! Part Three! Let's start with a quick introduction to common actuators! 1. DC motors, these use brushes to switch the ferrous core electromagnets on a rotor to rotate its magnetic field relative to surrounding magnets! They're one of the cheapest options with an average efficiency range of 30 to 90%. Larger DC motors and motors with higher turn counts are more efficient. 1.5 Coreless DC motors, by removing ferrous materials, losses from hysteresis are almost eliminated, dramatically increasing efficiency to nearly 90% even in small motors. Eliminating the ferrous materials reduces flux focusing, resulting in weaker fields and higher speeds. 2. Brushless DC motors (BLDC), these use a controller to switch the electromagnets on a stator to rotate the magnets of a rotor! Without brushes, they have the potential to be more efficient with higher power density compared to DC motors. Their efficiency and behavior vary depending on the algorithm and sensors used to control them. Coreless brushless motors exist but are rare and only used for very niche applications. 3. AC motors, a wide and incredibly varied category. They all rely on AC’s frequency to control them. With single phase AC motors relying on shaded poles, capacitors, or some other method to induce a rotating magnetic field. 3 phase AC motors naturally have a rotating field which usually gives them higher efficiency and power density. Notably, most AC motors are brushless. The most commonly used brushed AC motor is the universal motor, which is 4. Stepper motors, brushless motors with ferrous teeth to focus magnetic flux. This allows for incredible control (stepping) at the cost of greater mass, subsequently giving them higher rotary inertia. Usually 50 to 80% efficient depending on control algorithm/speed/and quality of the stepper. Due to their increasing mass production (& ubiquitous low cost controllers), they have appeal as a lower cost alternative to BLDC motors if one carefully designs around them. 5. Coiled Nylon Actuators! These things have an efficiency rating so low it's best to just say they aren't efficient. (0.01% typical, 2% achieved under extremely specific conditions in a lab.) Though they are exciting due to their incredible low cost of fabrication, they’re far too slow and the energy requirements are nonsensical. https://youtu.be/S4-3_DnKE9E https://youtu.be/wltLEzQnznM 6. Hydraulics! These rely on the distribution of pressure in a working liquid to move things like pistons. Though popular in large scale industry, their ability to be used in waifu's has yet to be proven. (Boston Dynamics Atlas runs on hydraulics but it's a power guzzler and heavy) Efficiency varies wildly depending on implementation. They would work great for a giantess! 7. Pneumatics, hydraulics lighter sister! This time the fluid is air! This has the advantage in weight. They aren't capable of the same power loads hydraulics are but, who wants their waifu to bench press a car? (Too loud and inefficient for mobile robotics.) 8. Wax motors, hydraulic systems where the working fluid is expanding melted (commonly paraffin) wax! Cheap, low power, and produce incredible forces! Too bad they're slow and hard to control. 9. Explosion! Yes, you can move things through explosions! Gas engines work through explosions! Artificial muscles can be made by exploding a hydrogen and oxygen mixture in a piston, then using hydrolysis to turn the water back into hydrogen and oxygen. None of this is efficient or practical but it's vital we keep our minds open! Though there are more actuators, most are derivatives or use these examples to work. Things like pulleys need an actuator to move them. Now, let's share, learn, and get our waifu moving! Servos! These use an actuator and sensor to control motion. DC, coreless DC, and BLDC motors are the most commonly used actuators for servos in mobile robotics. Potentiometers or hall effect sensors are the most commonly used sensors to detect rotary motion in servo systems. >Soft muscles (pneumatic system) with origami-inspired skeletons: https://youtu.be/OJO4FP0DXgQ[ >Printed pneumatics (TSA can also be used instead of pneumatics for actuation.) https://youtu.be/_X0rDW6NQ58 >Using sugar as soluble support material for printing silicone muscles: https://youtu.be/L0Z0-y3qpNk >Cavatappi artificial muscles (hydraulic coiled nylon hybrid): https://youtu.be/yXAJGH5s4cs https://youtu.be/MpCFumHFZvU https://www.designnews.com/automation/cavatappi-robot-muscles-have-5-times-strength-human-muscles >Twisted string actuators (TSA) Be extremely careful when choosing your strings. They will be put under extreme strain and must be durable. https://youtu.be/N4VMoYFrusg https://youtu.be/hFuzQ4ed-t0 https://youtu.be/J26y1nn7JMM https://youtu.be/zYrHGMiqC9A https://youtu.be/PABVsuV7Y1M https://youtu.be/tP9B3aqc4CI https://youtu.be/Y1uceDzhjKY >Continuous ransmission (CVT) / torque converters https://youtu.be/kVPjhmTThPo https://youtu.be/cd2-vsTzd9E https://youtu.be/c9e2y-5DMNc https://youtu.be/PEq5_b4LWNY >=== -edit subj
Edited last time by Chobitsu on 12/06/2023 (Wed) 03:06:55.
>>27021 What do you guys think of these? Especially the second one where they made a model that mimics human walking efficiency? Both are from this week/last week. https://www.news-medical.net/news/20240127/Biohybrid-robot-makes-sharp-rotations-with-lab-grown-muscles.aspx https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011771
>>28860 thanks I'll try it should work I think
>>28867 Thanks, just some addition: >Summary: Researchers achieved a significant advancement in robotics by replicating human-like variable speed walking using a musculoskeletal model. This model, steered by a reflex control method akin to the human nervous system, enhances our understanding of human locomotion and sets new standards for robotic technology. >The study utilized an innovative algorithm to optimize energy efficiency across various walking speeds. This breakthrough paves the way for future innovations in bipedal robots, prosthetics, and powered exoskeletons. https://github.com/Shunsuke-KK/reflex_plos_revision
Turbines driven by air might be interesting in some edge cases or for long term for optimization. I had the idea watching a video on Tesla Turbines. These can work with air pressure, but have up and downsides: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/9XTEGrze920 I mainly think of turbines an additional booster for an electric motor, e.g. to make it start faster and reach some high torque faster under some load. Or the turbine (Tesla or other) kicks in when the motor is already at a high speed but needs some extra kick for a moment. This is of course more relevant for builds which would use some air muscles or stabilizers already. I don't want to start this whole general discussion again, I think pressurized air actuators can be useful if combined with other actuators. Problems with Tesla Turbines in particular, based on some comment on that video: - centrifugal forces warp the discs that results in touching from the discs under extreme high speed, this can cause failure but also abrasion over a longer period of time. - seems to need high speed and only works with high speed, would need a gearbox making it less efficient. - efficiency goes down to ~65% under load, similar to normal turbines - sensitive stall speed - higher rotational masses compared to other turbines
Open file (19.16 KB 237x350 th-72069100.jpeg)
>>28910 hate turbines, this is 12th century technology i always wondered why you cant just send a balloon up into the ionosphere with a magnet, like the earth is already just one big solar magnet how hard can it be to put it to good use ffs
>>28911 Even if this was the case, how would we use this in a Robowaifu?
>>28910 We might be able to use a micro-turbine for the micro-rotary-engine, randoseru power pack? (>>28697, ...) After all Mazda made an awesome twin-turbo RX7 that was a rather-lightweight, relatively-inexpensive beast of a machine.
>>28921 With a balloon attached going up into the ionosphere?!
I feel like 20k is to much for this robot https://hello-robot.com/ do you guys have any suggestion to duplicate this telescopic approach much cheaper?
>>28943 Well, look for telescope actuators: https://youtu.be/X28CxOnxZh0[Embed] https://youtu.be/WavBXfh1giE[Embed] https://www.youtube.com/shorts/jWxARpHUVrg I recently had another one in my recommendations, but don't find it.
>>28943 >6x speed My fuggin sides are in orbit.
>>28957 ikr this is why I am thinking if there is a way to replicate this (make it faster) using pulley systems.
>>28958 why re-invent the wheel? just use rack & pinion.
>>28959 the problem is , if it lost energy in the height axis will fall, so I think a pulley system can keep it
>>28976 Screw-drive linear actuators for the main stalk, then. I love these things and use them in my mech projects. They only consume power when they move: to get them to maintain position you stop giving them power.
>>29007 that takes up a massive form factor and space is a great concern ruling such an actuator out for a humanoid with human form factor if you are going for humanlike full body articulation which requires so many more actuators that all are competing for space
>>29014 Oh, so you just want the approach, not building the same robot. I misunderstood this before. Do you mean the arm or the mechanism for up- and down? And how to put this into a human-like robot anyways?
Open file (192.87 KB 2500x1545 inline screw drive.jpeg)
>>29014 Not really...
you have your motor which acts as a muscle and gives the strength. look at the volume that takes up. then look at the volume taken by the gearing. if the gearing is taking up even close to as much space as the motor itself, then you are being very wasteful on space imo. that's why small pulleys to downgear like I posted earlier in this thread are WAY more efficient on space and get you your desired linear motion making them 100x superior to the type of linear actuators you all are posting now
also bonus points if the gearing can be relocated to another area than the motor and is not physically bound to a certain orientation with respect to the motor and required to be located at the same general location as the motor. this lack of flexibility in arranging motor and gearing gives you less options for negotiating fitting everything into your desired build volume of the robot. whereas pulley based downgearing gives you all the flexibility in the world and WAY smaller downgearing total volume taken up comparatively
>>29017 yes I'm building a different robot than any designs I've seen here but I am here to learn and share techniques. you say "Do you mean the arm or the mechanism for up- and down?" --- I am saying the bulky linear screw based actuator has too much hardware volume taken up by things that are not the motor itself and this volume is not something that should be given away so loosely as space is at a premium in value for a robot and must be guarded visciously if you want to fit enough stuff into the robot to do the things you want it to do (depending on how capable you want it to be of course). You say "And how to put this into a human-like robot anyways?" --- my concern is that fitting all the components one would like to fit to get the functionality one wants in the end is going to be a huge challenge we all face (unless we are creating like dumbed down super simple completely incapable robot toys that are laughably simple and incompetent in their capabilities.
Open file (736.27 KB 2001x1775 Haizakura(PrimaDoll).jpg)
>>28866 >>28867 >>28873 Good find! Adjusting power to actuators based on what is actually needed is essential for waifu efficiency! >>28910 Excellent out of the box thinking! Could be helpful for budget systems that need sudden bursts of power. Though, a proper coupling system to deliver power when needed, without imposing significant friction. >>28911 Explain how a magnet on a balloon could affect the actuation of a waifu. If you fail to do so, your post will be deleted. >>28921 >Power Randoseru Just like in Prima Doll! Though, routing kinetic energy from turbines into your waifu to animate her, is beyond my imagination at this point. >>28943 See >>29007 and >>29020 For the objectively correct answer on how to actuate the telescoping arm. >>28976 >Pulley maintaining static position sans power Are you referencing differential pulley systems (also known as differential/Chinese windlass)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_pulley https://makezine.com/projects/the-chinese-windlass// Otherwise, there is too much friction in your pulley system. Without input power, the system should allow for the load to fall until it is stopped. >>29014 >>29030 >>29032 >>29034 I understand you are learning and likely have familiarity with pulleys. This being said, every method of reduction and translation of energy has its place and use. Pulleys are not universally superior in all applications. For a linear actuator based telescoping robotic arm, the precision/load capacity/simplicity of implementation of a stepper driven lead screw relative to its cost is essentially unbeatable. A pulley system can be used to achieve the same results, it will be more expensive, more complex, and require the same volume per work area. If you wish to argue your point, do so with engineering. Prove me wrong by designing and implementing a pulley based robot arm. Furthermore, try to think and breathe while your post. You are speaking with others who going through similar challenges and want to see you succeed. Be kind, always.
Open file (1.09 MB 1500x1145 1706644887416999.jpg)
>>29061 >Just like in Prima Doll! Though, routing kinetic energy from turbines into your waifu to animate her, is beyond my imagination at this point. Haha, me too! :D Actually, I simply meant using the unified rotary/turbo engine coupled together with a smol electrical power generator as a means to keep her electrical systems functioning outdoors, beyond just the limits of her own batteries. > pic-related
Open file (1.49 MB 301x240 1699436929965443.gif)
>>28923 Kek. AS LONG AS YOU GIVE ME FREE HYDROGEN GENERATORS, ANON!111 :^) > (>>28681, >>28692)
Open file (51.95 KB 116x618 pulleys.jpg)
Open file (385.50 KB 916x628 pulleys stacked.jpg)
Open file (400.11 KB 916x628 pulley system size.jpg)
Open file (413.95 KB 916x628 pulley thickness.jpg)
Open file (281.51 KB 916x628 11cm long.jpg)
>>29061 you say " A pulley system can be used to achieve the same results, it will be more expensive, more complex, and require the same volume per work area" --- a pulley system is not necessarily more expensive and absolutely would not require the same volume by a long shot. It would be SIGNIFICANTLY less volume taken and more importantly, the volume taken would be like a pen so long and skinny which is ideally suited for fitting into the limbs and torso of a humanoid form factor body. the screw is thick and the pulleys can be very flat so stackable. the full pulley system for a 64:1 downgear can be 4mm thick and 11cm long and less than 1cm wide and it is very easy to fit many of these in a stackable manner into any humanoid limb of one's design with the volume constraints of a human body. Attached is design imagery of a 3d model of the archimedes pulley system, then teal green boxes showing the total build volume of such a pulley system with measurements demonstrated with a metric ruler to scale all placed within a humanoid robot forearm to scale over the top of the bldc motors between the motors and where the skin will be. you can see how many you can stack easily. The pulleys themselves can be made using 1x3x1mm bearings or 2x5x2.5mm bearings for larger force areas if needed in some cases. each bearing costs $25/200 bearings on aliexpress for the smaller size I just listed. so around $0.13 so $0.91 for a full archimedes pulley 64:1 downgear system. The weight will be a MASSIVE decrease compared to a ball screw style. The outer containment flanges can be sewn on through the center of the bearing by way of needle and thread and can be made of very thin plastic. effectively free. the string/cable PE braided fishing line 70lb test or 130lb test. You say "Pulleys are not universally superior in all applications" --- I argue they are for all applications relating to humanoid robotics of substantial complexity and humanlike movement and capabilities and humanlike form factor due to their light weight, extremely low cost, and their not being needed to be physically located in the same vicinity of the motor which creates tremendous freedom for squeezing things into the human form factor with less limitations on space concerns. You say "For a linear actuator based telescoping robotic arm, the precision/load capacity/simplicity of implementation of a stepper driven lead screw relative to its cost is essentially unbeatable.' --- I disagree completely. Maybe for a 3d printer but not for a humanoid. You say "try to think and breathe while you post. You are speaking with others who going through similar challenges and want to see you succeed. Be kind, always." --- this infers I'm not being kind which is false. Prove I'm not. This also infers I neither think nor breath while I post. Both of these inferences are false and unkind and insulting making you a hypocrite.
also stepper motors have inferior power density as compared to bldc motors. a so you add weight and lose power by going that route instead of bldc. also steppers can tend to be loud-ish although I hear this can be solved in software. Also, the pulleys are essentially silent as are the bldc motors. a 2430 bldc motor pulls 200w and is $11 and the archimedes pulley system is $0.91 in parts for the bearings. it can downgear it 64:1 ratio. gears also are loud whereas this is silent way to downgear.
here's a drawing of a even more simplified version of the basic gearing pulley for such a system as I am talking about based on a small bearing.
for clarity here's a little zoomed out image showing where all these archimedes pulley systems are in the arm design
Open file (722.61 KB 1446x2268 rivet based pulley.jpg)
i also developed an alternative pulley design based on a M1.7x4 PCB rivet as the center shaft and a copper butt connector (basically a hollow metal cylinder) of 1.5mm ID. they are a perfect fit. just have to cut the butt connector to length of around 3mm and then insert the hollow M1.7mmx4mm PCB rivet into it then flare the rivet and you now have your pulley. very easy to make. then run your string through. will need to be greased with white lithium grease. acts similar in principle to a door hinge. This setup should cost closer to $0.05 per pulley in the materials needed to make it. So it is cheaper than the bearing method above but might wear faster not sure. Chat gpt said it would wear faster.
I don't know why everyone acts like the physical robot is a solved problem. Inmoovs arm movement is limited, its face is expressionless, it has no legs, I haven't looked into it much but it probably doesn't have a mechanism for keeping its upper half balanced either. Poppy is better however those actuators are prohibitively expensive and even then it needs to be handholded into walking. Its also a small robot. I don't know if pulleys are a good idea but the way they usually work is by leverage rope length, a robot doesn't have space to work with, quiet the opposite.
>>29065 do you really need all those wires though
>>29071 I'll see if I can record a vid of SPUD's torso copying the angle of her GY-521 gyroscope. Should be a relatively safe demonstration since she is currently sitting on a support stand rather than her own legs right now.
downgearing by way of a worm screw: the finer the thread pitch the more it is downgearing right? but that is capped I'd assume. what is the higher end to downgearing ratio that can be achieved with this method of downgearing like 6:1? we'd want more like 64:1
>>29079 I'm assuming you are called the black lines in the main model wires when in fact they are just indicators connecting parts to labels and other parts like when you draw a picture and draw little lines pointing to objects in the picture and part of the line comes near the object it is pointing to and the other end of the line goes up to the text that labels what the part is. I noticed you did a picture of gears in your post. well I explained why those preferrably are to be avoided: noisy, physically located at top of motor so less flexibility in design as far as moving them around to other areas where you have more room, etc.
>>29065 Tad odd, I'm usually defending pulleys. In this case, I would be happy to make a linear robot arm with a lead screw if you'll make an arm with pulleys. Howabout a friendly competition to see which is best in practice? >>29088 There are many factors which affect functionality of lead screws. These resources provide good information for anyone learning about screw based actuators. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadscrew https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jrcs8lS7-M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BstZUC4tcOA
based on those videos, it looks like we might be looking at lead screws giving us a ballpark of 5:1 or 6:1 downgearing on the high end. What we want for a typical 2430 bldc motor is 64:1 at least if not 128:1 which can be achieved easily in a very small volume by way of pulleys. It does not appear lead screws offer significant down gearing at all like this
chat gpt and I discussed this just now and I'm gettign this: 64:1 is the very least downgearing we'd need. can a single lead screw give us that extreme downgearing or not? ChatGPT Achieving a 64:1 downgear ratio with a single lead screw might be challenging. Lead screws are generally better suited for lower gear ratios, typically up to 6:1 or 8:1. As you increase the gear ratio, the mechanical efficiency and precision can be compromised. For very high downgear ratios like 64:1, a pulley system, as you initially mentioned, may be more suitable. Combining multiple pulleys in a system, as per Archimedes' principles, allows for efficient torque multiplication and can achieve the higher ratios you're aiming for. In summary, while a single lead screw might struggle to provide a 64:1 downgear ratio efficiently, a pulley system could be a more viable solution for your specific needs.
interestingly, the lead screw idea involves clearly metal rubbing on metal and no bearing surfaces it seams to me. just like a nut and bolt it looks like. perhaps some are more sophisticated but I digress. I was thinking we could make pulleys also by having a shaft inside another shaft and the outer shaft rotates over the inner shaft - like the rivet drawing I made earlier, but shaped more like a bearing pulley in overal shape like the drawing I showed of a bearing based pully. This would remove the balls and so have more of a metal on metal approach but could be more robust for handling higher forces put onto it without crushing the bearing balls or warping the bearings. I noticed the load capacity of tiny bearings is startlingly and alarmingly low. like the 1x3x1mm ones are like 10lb only and the 2x5x2.5mm ones are like 35lb. the complexity of their design and larger number of moving parts they have make them vulnerable at these tiny sizes. So going with a metal on metal 2 part non-ball door hinge-like design (basically like fusing all the balls together with the core as one mass of metal) can make it able to handle way more forces evne if it loses some of the extreme frictionlessness it has. thoughts?
also for reference as a side note: your typical hobby servo motor which employs a dc brushed motor has gears integrated into the box it comes in that downgear that motor 180:1. so when I say we need at least 64:1, now you can see why. Higher speed, small, lower torque motors like the 2430 bldc motor need a ton of downgearing just like these small brushless dc motors in order for them to convert all of their inherent speed down to big torque and more moderate speeds. that is the principle at hand. lead screws primarily convert rotation to linear motion but are not really intended to be big downgearing approaches as they only offer very minor downgearing
Can't nitinol be used?
>>29071 >I don't know why everyone acts like the physical robot is a solved problem. Literally nobody does so. >pulleys are a good idea but the way they usually work is by leverage rope length I'm coming more and more to the conclusion that some soft parts should internally be made out of rope. >>29102 >Can't nitinol be used? >>1747 and >>13723
>>29092 What is this whole discussion even about?! The initial posting >>28943 showed a non-human robot. That's how I answered it, though it's kind of OT, until we get a thread for helper bots for chores. I focused on the telescope arm part. Obviously a inline screw drive or any screw-drive linear actuator might make sense for the vertical movement, though it would be worth contemplating why the hello-robot team didn't use them. More importantly, why on earth would anyone use that for the arm?! Also, how and why would anyone use a telescope element in a humanoid waifu(!) robot at all?! Could anyone picture that and maybe draw it for those who can't, so that we can all see how weird this would be looking? I assume >>28911 and >>28943 are troll attempts, and it would be worth contemplating to delete or move these together with the responses.
>>28202 That looks very useful. I had something like this in mind for some use cases, but it's good to have a few references. Especially combining it with a pulley: >>28229 >>28447 >>28449 >HALVE Thanks, very useful explanation. I guess for a lot of small valves piezo electric ones might be the right ones. I was thinking a while ago about using water bags as some kind of holding torque and a valve in between. So for example the chest could tilt sideways, but if water is in the bag inside and the valve closed it won't. If the valve is open it might tilt, in case a muscle is pulling it then it would certainly.
>Cycloidal Hub Gearbox Might require a resin printer and work better with a laser cutter https://youtu.be/IKkw4d7jyu0 https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:5437152 https://www.printables.com/model/333438-3d-printed-planetary- https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1apuReZyJan5Dxpbf_ou8xmFl2_huDlke >What makes cycloidal gearboxes so amazing? https://youtu.be/8GDMShY8vAU >I discovered something really interesting about cycloidal gear drives that I did not expect! In this video, I use a 3D printed gearbox to demonstrate just a few of the reasons why cycloidal gearboxes are so useful. Then a video on "CNC Machined vs 3D Printed Cycloidal Drive": https://youtu.be/mPwbDrXq50Q - with the result that the CNC one is much heavier but the 3D printed one broke under heavy load and didn't have as much torque. Down to 50% under strong load. This might mean a smaller CNC machined one would be better or that we need to use galvanization for the 3D printed parts. It might also be so that the motor can't be too strong, so with a relatively weak motor it doesn't matter.
>In this electronics basics episode we will have a closer look at motor encoders. Those can not only turn any motor into an awesome and satisfying input device for your projects; but can also turn any kind of motor into a kind of stepper motor. There are many different types of such encoders. So let me show you how they work, what they do and how you can use them. https://youtu.be/d3IH8zwUVYU https://www.solomotorcontrollers.com https://www.youtube.com/@SOLOMotorControllers
Thanks for your nice inputs here, Noido Dev. Cheers.
Open file (1.53 MB 3582x1713 Gen2.4.1.jpg)
>>25792 Hey Kiwi, > I have a new hoverboard which uses a cheap Chinese chip that no one has figured out how to hack yet. It looks like that chip is here, under the "Three Gate Driver Chips" picrel. Click on the MM32SPIN05/06 = 2 boards link. https://github.com/RoboDurden/Hoverboard-Firmware-Hack-Gen2.x/wiki I got there from here: https://github.com/RoboDurden/Hoverboard-Firmware-Hack-Gen2.x RoboDurden seems to be one of the masters at reflashing hoverboards. Hope this helps.
I found this guys video channel on YouTube where he covers an extraordinary amount of actuators and motors and damn near everything. It covers not only all types of electric motors, also, pneumatic, hydraulic and even covers all the math from the very basics to do detailed analysis of all of these. And all the parts needed plus programmable logic control and circuits to control all these things. A PILE! As I was scrolling through his set of instruction videos it blew me away the depth of material this guy covers. It would be well worth bookmarking this and when you have a question scroll through his videos as an answer, while maybe not easy, is likely there. https://www.youtube.com/@bigbadtech/videos?view=0&sort=dd&shelf_id=0
>>30048 Yeah, that looks like a goldmine, Grommet. Thanks very much! :^) yt-dlp -i https://www.youtube.com/@bigbadtech/videos Do it today, /robowaifu/ anons! :^)

Report/Delete/Moderation Forms