Quote
nicholas.seward
The shoulder offset is the distance from the center of the screw to the center of the arm attachment. The hub offset is from the central axis of the hub to the attachment of the other side of the arm. The is really no math savings in changing the geometry to eliminate them and it won't become like a Rostock. The shoulder rotation causes a translation and that has to be accounted for regardless of the offsets. You could make this have the Rostock math by adding traditional rails like a rostock and have a bearing pivot instead of a screw pivot for the shoulders.
Tks for the explanation, now I understand that there is a difference in the offsets of the stub arm of the hub, and the shoulder joint of the lead screw.
They looked the same to the unaided eye, but now that I'm aware of it, I think I understand why they are not the same.
I'm interested in what the final math will be so you can use double shear joints, with in-line arms.
With in-line arms the hub offset is being eliminated.
It seems like the preprocessor code would work if the hub offset value was changed to zero for the in-line arms/double shear joint configuration.
I only suggested deleting the offset variables because it didn't' appear they were needed.
But if you can set the hub offset to zero, and that will make the preprocessor code calculate correctly for in-line arms,
then that would be a useful solution for those who need in-line arms.
