Alt-BEAM Archive

Message #05929



To: beam@sgiblab.sgi.com
From: Bruce Robinson Bruce_Robinson@bc.sympatico.ca
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 1999 20:41:58 -0700
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: Another gearmotor source found


"Van Zoelen, Bram AA SSI-TSEA-352" wrote:
>
> I found a source for great small sized motor
> with gearbox. They are full metal about 15 mm
> diameter and 15 mm high. The output axe is
> slightly off-center and has a nice flat side.
> I didn't do any good tests but they run well
> at 4.5 V and turn at about 30 RPM. ...
>
> At the gearmotor the following markings can
> be found.
>
> Faulhaber Schondal
> 2020CO125
> 405
> Made in Germany

I recently bought 5 motors from Richard Piotter, also made by Faulhaber
Schondal. These are number 2230V012S, 22mm diameter, and about 52 mm
long. Metal motor housing and sturdy plastic gearbox housing.

Mine run very quietly at about 60 RPM at 4.5 V; they are impossible to
stop by gripping the shaft. They draw about 9 mA running free, and 50 mA
when nearly stalled. Under a heavy load, they draw about 25mA, which
puts them into the range where you could use a 74HC... driver chip to
power them, rather than an H-bridge.

Very nice little motors in my opinion. Thanks for the information site,
Bram.

Bruce



5930 Wed, 1 Sep 1999 19:00:06 -0500 [alt-beam] Re: hUFO goes online! "Richard Caudle"
content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable


---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

Hello Ben H. (et al),

I think that you're falling into the current science paradigm. What I mean=
by that is this: Some old fart said that these things work a certian way =
and we accept that as the only 'truth'. This ancient bit of flatulence mos=
t likely had all the diagrams and all the figures to prove his premise. Af=
ter all, he has to keep the funding coming in, dosen't he? Didn't someone =
on the list make the comment that everyone fudges his results? We have bee=
n eating fudge for all these years and didn't realize you could add nuts to=
it and still have fudge.

IMHO, science as we know it is an utter failure. We are taught to accept w=
hat the establishment tells us, not to question the validity of their prece=
pts, and to completely accept the exclusivity of their claims. Some things=
we are not able to explain, at least yet. That by no means makes them any=
less real.

Keep an open mind and try building the thing yourself. There are several p=
eople who have made such devices and even a couple on this list. =


Richard Caudle

---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

p.s. Hey Kyle, got any drawings? I can't find the article on Ian's site.


content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable



>



Hello Ben H. (et al), V>
 

I think that you're falling into=
the =

current science paradigm.  What I mean by that is this:  Some old=
fart =

said that these things work a certian way and we accept that as the onl=
y =

'truth'.  This ancient bit of flatulence most likely had all the =

diagrams and all the figures to prove his premise.  After all, he has =
to =

keep the funding coming in, dosen't he? Didn't someone on the list make th=
e =

comment that everyone fudges his results?  We have been eatin=
g =

fudge for all these years and didn't realize you could add nuts to it =

and still have fudge.

 

IMHO, science as we know it is a=
n utter =

failure.  We are taught to accept what the =

establishment tells us, not to question the valid=
ity =

of their precepts, and to completely accept the exclusivity of their =

claims.  Some things we are not able to explain, at least yet.  T=
hat =

by no means makes them any less real.

 

Keep an open mind and try buildi=
ng the =

thing yourself.  There are several people who have made such devices a=
nd =

even a couple on this list. 

 

Richard Caudle




p.s.  Hey Kyle, got any =

drawings?  I can't find the article on Ian's =

site.




Home