Quote:
Originally Posted by micondie
The binding of a universal joint occurs at extreme angles ( like in an off-raod vehicle's driveshaft or front wheel drive axles) which is why CV joints are used in such applications. A CV joint has more bearing surfaces than a simple u-joint which usually means more friction. Does anyone have any data to support/refute this?
|
It depends on the type of CV joint. There are triangulated CV joints, then there are the types that you normally find in sets of impact tools as well, and a few other types beyond those that I've only seen on paper.
The CV type that you normally find on cars is the triangulated one. It has three bearings that have X surface area, which actually appears to be similar, if not slightly less, contacted surface area than the needle bearings in U-joints of comparable sizes.
The CV type that is commonly used in impact tool sets (wobble adapter) is just a ball in socket design with an arm or 3 that extends from the socket into the ball. The ball is slotted to allow it to move freely over those arms, while still being able to make every movement that a ball should be able to make without binding. Those setups are seldom good for more than about 45* of usable angle, though, where U-joints
can function at a higher angle, but seldom last very long when made to.
The bearing contacted surface for the ball in socket design is less than that of the U-joint or the triangulated CV joint for a similar sized piece.