Re: [TANKS] Re: New Track System

[Derek Engelhaupt]

I was using two 50 pitch chains on a 4" track.  Still have the tracks and
one day I'd like to play with using solid blocks to see if the extra
stiffness makes the track reliable, but that is a really low priority for
me.  Between motorcycle track days, my new touring bike, building
furniture, and a girlfriend I really haven't had any time to work on my
tanks.  Some of my furniture projects are coming to a close so I've
actually been gathering materials to finally finish my KV-2.  Just bought
some 8000mAH LiPo batteries, some 8 and 10 guage wire, connectors, and
charger so I am going to get it running again soon.  Most of the work I
have left to do is finishing work.  Gotta break the whole tank down and
glue all the PVC together, fill the holes, build some detail items, and
paint.  The running gear is solid and tracks reliable at this point.  The
new batteries sure free up A LOT of space in the tank and weight.

Derek

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Frank Pittelli 
wrote:

> Derek's experience is the rule, not the exception.
>
> Based on my experience (which goes back to the original dual-chain bicycle
> track) and the collective experience of everyone who has built, tested and
> battled such designs in the last 15 years, the dual-chain design is far
> more problematic than either a single-chain design or a link-drive design.
> Lateral forces on the track immediately cause the chains to skew, which
> increases the likelihood of jumping one of the chains off a sprocket tooth
> in rough terrain.  Guide horns help decrease the likelihood, but doesn't
> decrease it enough to make the tracks reliable enough in our world (which
> is, by far, the toughest test of scale tracks).
>
> When it comes to chain designs, size matters.  Based on quite a few people
> who have tried such an approach over the years, #40 chain is too small and
> not rigid enough to be used as either a single-chain or dual-chain track
> design in our operating scale and terrain.  On the other hand, #60 chain is
> so rigid that it has proven very reliable when used in a single-chain
> design, thereby eliminating the need for a dual-chain design.
>
> That said, the design being discussed is the first time someone has used
> pins that go from one side of the track to the other, using the track pad
> itself to keep the pins parallel.  This *could* provide the rigidity needed
> to prevent chain skew in a hard turn, thereby preventing a dreaded
> derailment.  I say *could* because it all comes down to the stiffness of
> the plastic pads and the amount of sideways movement allowed between the
> pads and the pins.  No amount of calculation or workbench testing will
> provide the required answers.  The track needs to be installed on a tank
> chassis and driven through the roughest terrain possible by an operator
> skilled in abusing vehicles to determine if the design is reliable or not.
>
> Battlefield-tested isn't a marketing slogan.
>
> On 10/29/2015 12:26 PM, Derek Engelhaupt wrote:
>
>> I believe I said the tracks might have issues staying on since they are
>> similar to my design that I abandoned because they didn't stay on in
>> high stress due to lack of the center guides.  Even with the center
>> guides, mine flexed too much side to side so they still came off the
>> sprockets.
>>
>
> --
> --
> You are currently subscribed to the "R/C Tank Combat" group.
> To post a message, send email to rctankcombat@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe, send email to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
> Visit the group at http://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat
>
> --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "R/C Tank Combat" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
-- 
You are currently subscribed to the "R/C Tank Combat" group.
To post a message, send email to rctankcombat@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe, send email to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
Visit the group at http://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "R/C 
Tank Combat" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [TANKS] Re: New Track System

[Michael Butts]

Perhaps then his tracks would be best applied in "feather weight" vehicles and 
in vehicles operating on better groomed/smoother surfaces? Would it be 
potentially feasible in a 50lb tank with a very robust tensioning system? 
Mike Butts

> On Oct 29, 2015, at 1:09 PM, Frank Pittelli  wrote:
> 
> Derek's experience is the rule, not the exception.
> 
> Based on my experience (which goes back to the original dual-chain bicycle 
> track) and the collective experience of everyone who has built, tested and 
> battled such designs in the last 15 years, the dual-chain design is far more 
> problematic than either a single-chain design or a link-drive design.  
> Lateral forces on the track immediately cause the chains to skew, which 
> increases the likelihood of jumping one of the chains off a sprocket tooth in 
> rough terrain.  Guide horns help decrease the likelihood, but doesn't 
> decrease it enough to make the tracks reliable enough in our world (which is, 
> by far, the toughest test of scale tracks).
> 
> When it comes to chain designs, size matters.  Based on quite a few people 
> who have tried such an approach over the years, #40 chain is too small and 
> not rigid enough to be used as either a single-chain or dual-chain track 
> design in our operating scale and terrain.  On the other hand, #60 chain is 
> so rigid that it has proven very reliable when used in a single-chain design, 
> thereby eliminating the need for a dual-chain design.
> 
> That said, the design being discussed is the first time someone has used pins 
> that go from one side of the track to the other, using the track pad itself 
> to keep the pins parallel.  This *could* provide the rigidity needed to 
> prevent chain skew in a hard turn, thereby preventing a dreaded derailment.  
> I say *could* because it all comes down to the stiffness of the plastic pads 
> and the amount of sideways movement allowed between the pads and the pins.  
> No amount of calculation or workbench testing will provide the required 
> answers.  The track needs to be installed on a tank chassis and driven 
> through the roughest terrain possible by an operator skilled in abusing 
> vehicles to determine if the design is reliable or not.
> 
> Battlefield-tested isn't a marketing slogan.
> 
>> On 10/29/2015 12:26 PM, Derek Engelhaupt wrote:
>> I believe I said the tracks might have issues staying on since they are
>> similar to my design that I abandoned because they didn't stay on in
>> high stress due to lack of the center guides.  Even with the center
>> guides, mine flexed too much side to side so they still came off the
>> sprockets.
> 
> -- 
> -- 
> You are currently subscribed to the "R/C Tank Combat" group.
> To post a message, send email to rctankcombat@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe, send email to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
> Visit the group at http://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat
> 
> --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "R/C Tank Combat" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
-- 
You are currently subscribed to the "R/C Tank Combat" group.
To post a message, send email to rctankcombat@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe, send email to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
Visit the group at http://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "R/C 
Tank Combat" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [TANKS] Re: New Track System

[Frank Pittelli]

Derek's experience is the rule, not the exception.

Based on my experience (which goes back to the original dual-chain 
bicycle track) and the collective experience of everyone who has built, 
tested and battled such designs in the last 15 years, the dual-chain 
design is far more problematic than either a single-chain design or a 
link-drive design.  Lateral forces on the track immediately cause the 
chains to skew, which increases the likelihood of jumping one of the 
chains off a sprocket tooth in rough terrain.  Guide horns help decrease 
the likelihood, but doesn't decrease it enough to make the tracks 
reliable enough in our world (which is, by far, the toughest test of 
scale tracks).


When it comes to chain designs, size matters.  Based on quite a few 
people who have tried such an approach over the years, #40 chain is too 
small and not rigid enough to be used as either a single-chain or 
dual-chain track design in our operating scale and terrain.  On the 
other hand, #60 chain is so rigid that it has proven very reliable when 
used in a single-chain design, thereby eliminating the need for a 
dual-chain design.


That said, the design being discussed is the first time someone has used 
pins that go from one side of the track to the other, using the track 
pad itself to keep the pins parallel.  This *could* provide the rigidity 
needed to prevent chain skew in a hard turn, thereby preventing a 
dreaded derailment.  I say *could* because it all comes down to the 
stiffness of the plastic pads and the amount of sideways movement 
allowed between the pads and the pins.  No amount of calculation or 
workbench testing will provide the required answers.  The track needs to 
be installed on a tank chassis and driven through the roughest terrain 
possible by an operator skilled in abusing vehicles to determine if the 
design is reliable or not.


Battlefield-tested isn't a marketing slogan.

On 10/29/2015 12:26 PM, Derek Engelhaupt wrote:

I believe I said the tracks might have issues staying on since they are
similar to my design that I abandoned because they didn't stay on in
high stress due to lack of the center guides.  Even with the center
guides, mine flexed too much side to side so they still came off the
sprockets.


--
--
You are currently subscribed to the "R/C Tank Combat" group.
To post a message, send email to rctankcombat@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe, send email to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
Visit the group at http://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "R/C Tank Combat" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[TANKS] Re: AAV-7 Fun Project

[Loic atFOA]

And this is a video of the water test. The weight distribution was slightly 
off and the vehicle is inclined on one side, but otherwise no problem. Very 
small leak at the idler tension system on the back through the bushing
Water Test on YouTube  (click 
here)

-- 
-- 
You are currently subscribed to the "R/C Tank Combat" group.
To post a message, send email to rctankcombat@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe, send email to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
Visit the group at http://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "R/C 
Tank Combat" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [TANKS] Re: New Track System

[Derek Engelhaupt]

I believe I said the tracks might have issues staying on since they are
similar to my design that I abandoned because they didn't stay on in high
stress due to lack of the center guides.  Even with the center guides, mine
flexed too much side to side so they still came off the sprockets.

Derek

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Michael Butts 
wrote:

> If I recall correctly, a while back he petitioned anyone building a tank
> to help him out with testing. He never got much of a response. I told him I
> would be happy to help but my timeline is pretty long and I'm still in the
> planning stage. I have seen a successful metal hulled, suspended, and
> roller chain tracked tank on YouTube. I believe it was a 1/10 scale
> Leclerc. The fella drove it with him standing on top of it. And also had a
> video (from a side mounted camera) showing the suspension articulation and
> track movement while driving it around. Seemed pretty solid. I would say
> that if he is committed to roller chain then he can make it work reliably.
> I also believe that rc tank combat is not the only market he is aiming at.
> Mike Butts
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Oct 26, 2015, at 7:20 AM, TyngTech  wrote:
>
> Pretty website but has this track been tested with a 120lb tank neutral
> turning in tall grass yet?  Reason I ask is that without guide horns I
> think this track will run off the drive sprocket (especially with a
> suspended tank).  The first gen tanks used chain tracks (with wood slats)
> and slipping off the drive sprockets was the issue with them if I recall.
>
> ST
>
> On Sunday, October 25, 2015 at 6:49:22 PM UTC-4, Joshua Updyke wrote:
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I posted a while back and you all were very helpful with details about
>> how continuous track systems work. I wanted to share my progress. If anyone
>> is interested you can check out the official website here:
>>
>> http://www.tankchain.com/shop/
>>
>> and if you want to see the development blog you can see it here:
>> https://hackaday.io/project/6106-modular-continuous-track-system
>>
>> There is some good information about casting rubber parts there that I
>> think could help.
>>
>> Josh
>>
> --
> --
> You are currently subscribed to the "R/C Tank Combat" group.
> To post a message, send email to rctankcombat@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe, send email to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
> Visit the group at http://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "R/C Tank Combat" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
> --
> --
> You are currently subscribed to the "R/C Tank Combat" group.
> To post a message, send email to rctankcombat@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe, send email to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
> Visit the group at http://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "R/C Tank Combat" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
-- 
You are currently subscribed to the "R/C Tank Combat" group.
To post a message, send email to rctankcombat@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe, send email to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
Visit the group at http://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "R/C 
Tank Combat" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[TANKS] Re: Small Markers

[neroc1]

We so need a "like " button 





>
>
> On Thursday, October 15, 2015 at 3:54:22 PM UTC-4, neroc1 wrote:
>>
>> ... Your completed Locust (if the same as mine) will be about 22 inches 
>> long. I can pop mine under one arm and walk around with it. ...
>>
>

-- 
-- 
You are currently subscribed to the "R/C Tank Combat" group.
To post a message, send email to rctankcombat@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe, send email to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
Visit the group at http://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "R/C 
Tank Combat" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.