5 ms·
But that's the crux of engineering: these two things are in tension – the part which is designed to fail safely if a jam occurs will, by its very nature, also b
by msbarnett 4y ago
But that's the crux of engineering: these two things are in tension – the part which is designed to fail safely if a jam occurs will, by its very nature, also be subject to wearing down sooner than if it were made of cast iron and caused the entire mixer to fail catastrophically during a jam.
In reality, nothing is so simple as waving your hands and declaring "no plastic 'planned obsolescence' parts!". Everything is a trade-off. A more effective way of pushing companies to position the trade-off in a way that rewards long-term durability would probably be to mandate longer warranty periods, rather than try to dictate what gears ought to be made out of in a vacuum divorced from the tradeoffs involved.
- mrob 4y agoThere are overload protection mechanisms without sacrificial parts, e.g. ball detents. They don't inherently have to wear down faster. Plastic gears are likely cheaper and lighter, though.
- InitialLastName 4y agoThe key would seem to be if the part that fails is easily replaceable, then. If I make a design that has a part meant to fail-safe in a situation that would otherwise be dangerous to the other devices (I'm an EE rather than an ME, so we'll call it a "fuse"), the good-faith repairability practice is to put the part in an accessible location and make it a part that is readily available. If I wanted to encourage replacement of the whole device, maybe I make it a soldered-on part in the potted section of the PCB.
- sokoloff 4y agoI was quite pleased with the design for the current measurement fuse on my HP 3458A meter: https://youtu.be/sdyDUl5xYpE https://youtu.be/sdyDUl5xYpE