Re: Forget Rohloff, I want one of these
- From: Naqerj <pattle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 19:49:06 +0100
David Martin wrote:
There are two obvious sources of inefficiency here, one is the friction needed to ensure the ball does not slip, and the other is that the ball will naturally 'scrub' against the input and output shafts, causing friction and wear.
I don't pretend for a moment that I understand how, but these inefficiencies can be overcome. CVTs using the general principle have been in use for ages, so they must work. The more usual kind have the ball on a vertical axle and running between two cones. The trouble with this is that it reverses the direction of drive - OK for industrial use but not so good for a bicycle. The clever bit about this one is the way the drive is rearranged to keep everything turning in the same direction.
-- Andrew .
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Forget Rohloff, I want one of these
- From: Alan Braggins
- Re: Forget Rohloff, I want one of these
- References:
- Forget Rohloff, I want one of these
- From: David Martin
- Re: Forget Rohloff, I want one of these
- From: Mike Causer
- Re: Forget Rohloff, I want one of these
- From: David Martin
- Re: Forget Rohloff, I want one of these
- From: Mike Causer
- Re: Forget Rohloff, I want one of these
- From: David Martin
- Forget Rohloff, I want one of these
- Prev by Date: Re: Cyclist blinded by egg.
- Next by Date: Re: All done
- Previous by thread: Re: Forget Rohloff, I want one of these
- Next by thread: Re: Forget Rohloff, I want one of these
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading