Honda Insight Forum banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hello.

I’ve recently devised a type of transmission and I wonder if it can benefit any applications. For starters, the transmission is purely mechanical with an efficiency just a tad bit 0.3% lower than a regular spur gear. So instead of an efficiency of 99% it’ll have an efficiency of 98.7%. You get the idea.

Other than that, it’s very durable and can be made to handle any torque.

It’s very light and compact. If designed for cars, it can easily shave off 50lbs compared to a 5 speeds manual, even more compared to an automatic.

Okay, here’s the thing that’s distinctive about this transmission: it can offer an infinite amount of gear ratio (within a range).

But it cannot be shifted continuously. It still requires a clutch, just like a regular transmission. However, you (or the computer) have infinite gear ratios to choose where to shift to.

Is there any applications that can be benefited by this?

Thanks.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,332 Posts
Fascinating. You need to get some sound legal advice from a trusted source before describing it to anyone. That is assuming that it is really something new.

Certainly there would be a use for it, But if you hope to gain anything (other than recognition) for your invention you must keep it to yourself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
Hmm, I have a recollection of a friend of mine telling me that his dad used to have a motorcycle with a transmission kind of like that. (Continuous gear ratio, but required a clutch to change ratios) I don't know if that was the same or a similar design or something completely different.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,211 Posts
To answer unclehan's question:

Yes.

Now get your too-trusting behind over to a patent attorney RIGHT NOW.

Now! Don't bother to turn the computer off. GO!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,448 Posts
unclehan said:
it’s very durable and can be made to handle any torque.

I would be careful about making that claim, but want me to test that theory for you? (Please :D) I got about a 400+ ftlb 12 second Camaro we can hook it up to, if that doesn't destroy it I think I have an electric motor somewhere that will peak at something like 1000 ftlb's.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Rick said:
unclehan said:
it’s very durable and can be made to handle any torque.

I would be careful about making that claim, but want me to test that theory for you? (Please :D) I got about a 400+ ftlb 12 second Camaro we can hook it up to, if that doesn't destroy it I think I have an electric motor somewhere that will peak at something like 1000 ftlb's.
For any torque, you can build it just as strong. The strength is limited by the strength of steel and size, not by design.

Remember, it's not dependent on friction, unlike a belt CVT. It's teethed, just like any gear or chain.

I was rather concentrating on semi trucks with 1500 ft lb of torque, and it have to last 500,000 miles. Because I think semi truck is probably the vehicle that can benefit the most, if at all. Semi trucks and buses, in fact.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,332 Posts
Patent searches are not expensive. You can do it yourself if you have the time. I believe you can even do a search of Patent abstracts online. If you didscuss this idea with anyone online you have essentially published the plans and the idea becomes public domain. During the next 6 months anyone in the world can patent your idea and claim it was theirs. After that no one can patent it anywhere. Applying for a patent yourself is not expensive but probably would not hold up if contested. It would however prove you were the real inventor. Even a weak patent is worth something.

My advice would be to apply for a patent yourself if you don't have much money as this will establish a priority date, and then find the money to get it properly ammended whithin the next six months. I make this suggestion as an inventor who has never made a dime on a patent, so my advice is probably worth less than a dime. I can however say that I hope you succeed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,291 Posts
I'm pretty sure I just figured out how you accomplish this. I don't want to give it away, but it's been around for years. Maybe I'm wrong and you (or I?) am out in left field...Either way, do a patent search and contact a competant patent lawyer...The process is far from cheap though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
IOn high school, they had an engineering book with a design for a continuously variable transmission in it that seems much better than the modern method. Not sure if it's the same thing you came up with or not. The method described in this book had two cones with a gear connecting them. By moving the gear along it's axle, it touched nearer the apex of one cone and nearer the base on the other, changing the gear ratio.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,332 Posts
Foxpaw, I saw that one described in Pop Sci many years ago!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Foxpaw said:
The method described in this book had two cones with a gear connecting them. By moving the gear along it's axle, it touched nearer the apex of one cone and nearer the base on the other, changing the gear ratio.
The situation you described can only be accomplished with a belt, ie no teeth. Therefore it's limited in torque ability and efficiency.

The reason it cannot have teeth is because the distance between the teeth diverges toward the base of the cone and converges toward the apex of the cone. Therefore, you can't have a "gear" driving between them. And also, remember, there will always be a ONE TO ONE relationship between the teeth, that means the ratio will be fixed, as the thing rotates around and around.

BTW, how significant is 60 lbs? My transmission can shave off 60 lbs compared to a 5 speed manual.



Thanks.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
830 Posts
Hello UncleHan,

I do not know if the expression is right but, I feel my leg is being pulled here.
You can remove 60 lbs from my 91 lbs manual transmission? 31 lbs Nothing will be left but the casing, no room for shafts or bearings: the base of any transmission. Even a simple planetary gear into a casing would weigh that much.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Yves M. said:
Hello UncleHan,

I do not know if the expression is right but, I feel my leg is being pulled here.
You can remove 60 lbs from my 91 lbs manual transmission? 31 lbs Nothing will be left but the casing, no room for shafts or bearings: the base of any transmission. Even a simple planetary gear into a casing would weigh that much.
Does the 91lb include the clutch?

Anyway, the Civic uses a very light transmission because it doesn't have much torque. By 60 lbs I was comparing it to a transmission of a more powerful car.

But since we are talking about the civics, for my transmission to handle the torque of it, it'll probably be about 20 lbs less than the 91lb, so around 70 lb.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
Yes, the CVT gets less mileage. I think this is because it's heavier and has more losses in it. Also the engine for CVT insights is very slightly different.

unclehan said:
Foxpaw said:
The method described in this book had two cones with a gear connecting them. By moving the gear along it's axle, it touched nearer the apex of one cone and nearer the base on the other, changing the gear ratio.
The situation you described can only be accomplished with a belt, ie no teeth. Therefore it's limited in torque ability and efficiency.

The reason it cannot have teeth is because the distance between the teeth diverges toward the base of the cone and converges toward the apex of the cone. Therefore, you can't have a "gear" driving between them. And also, remember, there will always be a ONE TO ONE relationship between the teeth, that means the ratio will be fixed, as the thing rotates around and around.
I hate to be prickly, but I didn't just make that up, it's an actual working design.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,291 Posts
The cones were my immediate thought.

The 2nd one I came up with (undoubtably not the first one to think of this) was wheel, with a sliding pickup gear (think record player). By moving the gear in and out, the diameter of the drive wheel changes, and thus your ratio changes...

There are SO MANY gearset designs, that I would be very impressed if it has not all been thought of before. :)

One I thought of years ago was to actually physically expand one or both of the gears itself. It would be almost a "bellows" design if pictured. Probably very limited in power though...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Do you guys know if they includes the clutch pack when they give a spec on the weight of a manual transmission?

If so, how much does the clutch pack on the 5 speed Insight weigh? About.

Thanks
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top