The worm wheel wears on only one side of the tooth for the same reason that maslow does not need to account for backlash. The torsional load on each shaft is always in a constant direction regardless of driven direction. We never push the chain, only pull, even when letting it out. This means MTBF for balanced loads can effectively be cut in half for maslow because we are only using half of each gear. Also, plastic creep could occur if the sled weight is left hanging in a hot garage. The next startup would produce accelerated wear as the engaged teeth have shifted somewhat.
The worm wheel gear(gear that meshes with the worm) that is normally plastic and apparently sometimes problematic is brass in these pictures.
Edit: I just noticed that the wave shaped gears described here are not the worm wheel plastic gears. The wave shaped outer teeth of the compound gear on the paper towel appear to be the driven gear of the 3rd stage, made of metal. I thought the post was saying plastic gear was the one that stripped, but I was mistaken.
I know that thread is very old, but does anyone have a source or even specific model number for the motor/gearbox combination used by @mcmiley in that thread? Know what his specific problems were? Overcurrent, or are those really brushless?
I’d like to compare it to a stock maslow motor. Closest to current etonm website appears to be either ET-WGM58BL or ET-WGM58. ET-WGM58BL does not say it is brushless, but picture shows 3 wires. ET-WGM58 text description says it is brushless but picture has 2 wires. Something ain’t right. No way to know what you will actually get.
It has dual output shafts which could be useful for the parallelogram type.
The motor appears to be sealed(smooth black motor case, vs natural metal with flux ring). This is a tradeoff. It has no fan and openings to collect sawdust. It has no fan and openings to keep itself cool. Instead, it has a larger thermal mass motor housing. This lets it absorb the heat created during a temporary stall, a condition where a fan would not be running. The lack of fan also means that it takes longer to dissipate the absorbed heat. If too much time is spent at high load, it can contribute to heat soak where eventually the entire thermal mass is at an even high temperature and things(insulation, grease, brushholders, plastic parts) can start to break down. That is why similar motors with a higher stall current rating often have a lower duty cycle rating.
Has any analysis been done to see the percentage of time an average maslow project spends in percentage buckets of max rated axis motor RPM?