I think the next generation is to completely get rid of bearings and use a non-spinning axle ;D
while my mag/lev idea was a joke, and for the most part I agree that there isnât much room for improvement in the current bearing setup.
But I donât agree that seeking improvements are âneverâ worth it. Iâm sure at some point someone thought âwhy put a bearing in a yoyo? who would want to pay for that additional cost?â
That is backward logic actually.
Though itâs probably still useless anyway since one of the bearing will always have more friction than the other, only one bearing will spin. The only case that both bearing spins independently are when there is high enough rpm that one bearing canât take it alone, not gonna happen on yoyos. Or when one bearing suddenly fail mid play.
The âextra surfaces causing more frictionâ doesnât make sense in this case. It should be âif one surface of one of the bearing have too much friction, it will be helped by the slippier surface of the other bearingâ, while if you only use one bearing you need to âgo throughâ that alone.
Now youâre on to something! ;D
The bearings available today are not holding you backâŚMy idea of the perfect bearing would be a
Dif-e-yo konkave that cost three dollars a copy.
I did away with the whole bearing axel system and use a stick of butter between the yoyo sides.
Very smooth.
Seems legitâŚ
I think you did away with the whole brain system and put a stick of butter between your earsđ
1 Like
To all those who said my not idea wonât work,
Prove It. Post specific scientific data and proof that this idea wonât work. Every thing else is just speculation.
The burden of proof, my friend, is on you. Why would someone need to scientifically prove their speculation against your own?
If you are as confident in your âideaâ as you seem, then make it happen. Make every naysayer in this thread look silly. Until then, accept the scrutiny. People donât agree on everything. Itâs okay.
Youâll be fine. #icanproveit
1 Like
Yeah?
Well, I think the Moon is made of green cheese.
And if you donât think so; Prove itđ¤
2 Likes
Slice off the bearing post, fix up the threads, slap the bearings together , and try it. Donât expect us to do the hard work for you. Proving it true or false is not our work, but yours. If it works well, mod more yoyos that way. I know Iâll try one if youâll do it, or get a reliable modder to do it. I bet others would as well. We could tell you if youâve hit gold or mold (donât know why mold other than it rhymes).
For me critical thinking is usually enough as a proof.
In case of double bearing stacked one another, what do you think will happen? both bearings spins at the same time? it sounds logical until you think about it more.
If you want both bearings to spin, both bearings have to have exactly the same friction, otherwise only one bearing will spin. Even a very minute difference that one bearing have a little more or less friction, only the bearing with the less friction will spin.
And as I said before, the only time it will be useful is when one bearing suddenly fails, or when they work on a very high rpm that the spinning bearing have increased friction and forced the other bearing to spin, which is not the case on yoyos.
Tear a piece of paper into three equal parts, but leave them intact. Hold each of the outer parts and slowly tear it into three, can you do it? no. Unless there is exactly the same amount of paper left before tearing, and even then that doesnât guarantee it to separate into three. However if you can tear it very close to separating and pull very very fast that the momentum of the middle part hold it still for a split second, only by then it will separate into three.
Similarly, two bearings stacked together cannot spin at the same time unless there is exactly the same friction, which pretty much doesnât occur in real life.
One bearing will always have less friction, only that one spins.
Correct me if I am wrong, but if you had a small bearing inside a larger bearing, no matter the friction the smaller bearing is always going to spin faster, it has a shorter distance to travel. So if one bearing is going faster than the other wouldnât that ultimately make the bearing slower?
Iâm having a hard time trying to understand what you said. Letâs say a regular yoyo spins at 100 rpm, that means the bearing spins at 100 rpm, it cannot go faster or slower than the yoyo itâs attached to regardless of bearing size.
Unless when you say âfasterâ you actually means âspin longerâ, I guess it makes sense that within the same quality, the smaller bearing may have less friction overall because of the shorter traveling distance. But since in this case the smaller bearing have less friction, the bigger bearing wonât spin.
Say, just for example, youâre putting a Size A inside of a Size C. The Size A is going to spin at a higher RPM, it has a shorter distance to travel being smaller. The Size C is going to spin at a lower RPM, itâs larger and travels at a longer distance. Much like a race track, the quickest way around the track is the inside, itâs a shorter distance.
So you put the A inside the Size C, the Size a is moving at a higher RPM than the Size C, so the friction of the slower RPM size C is going to negate any of the extra spin time that you are gaining from the size A, or smaller bearing on the inside.
Youâd have two sets of bearings traveling at different speeds, which if my thinking is correct, would average to the lowest RPM. Plus with the extra surface area within this hypothetical bearing, it would create more friction than a single bearing, which would ultimately create a slower bearing, which would create less spin times.
Just thinking out loud here. Thinking about old physics and engineering courses Iâve taken (but those have been awhile ;D )
on a side note, I wonder sometimes about making bearings out of other materials, how that would work.
There is a synthetic material used by different government agencies, that a guitar pick manufacturer uses. Itâs really expensive, but it pretty much does not wear, highly heat resistant and self lubricating. Iâve used the same pick for about 5 years now and it shows no signs of wear. Wonder making the balls out of that material, how that would change a bearing. Only downside is a piece of that material that is 10"x10"x1/2" is $4800!
A smaller bearing produces higher RPMS on the throw (it rotates more times per unit of distance when unwinding) but while spinning the two bearings will have the same theoretical RPMs.
The hub of a wheel rotates the same number of times as the outside of a tire. Just because itâs smaller doesnât mean itâs moving faster.
In the case of the doubled bearings, there will be a difference in speed simply because the one with less friction will be the one doing the moving⌠but that could end up being either the small or the big.
Either way, thereâs no net benefit to stacking bearings and that each layer increases the odds of detrimental effect. Bearings are meant to reduce friction when compared to no bearing at all, and they do this job very well! But the reduction in friction vs. no bearing isnât cumulative. Youâre now trying to reduce friction on a bearing by adding a bearing! If the problem is that the one bearing isnât frictionless enough, you canât fix it by adding another bearing, you would replace it with one that has less friction until your needs/specs are met.
You can imagine if you made a disc of bearing stacks⌠10 deep or whatever⌠and stuck them on a pole or whatever: Even without doing the math, you can intuitively guess based on your experience of the world that the layers will affect one another, with the cruddiest layer determining whether the thing spins nicely throughout or not, and the layer with the least friction informing which part of your disc is actually going to spin. But what you DONâT imagine that the friction âsavingsâ are going to be passed out to each layer until the outer layer is near frictionless! We can (I hope) easily picture that thereâs no stacking effect from the center to the outside.
Just because the proposed improvement is only 2 bearings, not 10 concentric bearings, doesnât change the physics, it only changes the scope. If itâs easy to imagine the effect of 10 concentric bearings, you just have to take that visualization and realize that it applies to 2 bearings as well.
We know that if it were that easy to reduce friction (ie. adding more bearings!), the worldâs rotating parts (wheels on the bus!) would be made up of concentric bearings.
1 Like
I think you misunderstood âRPMâ, it stands for Revolutions Per Minute; the number of revolutions it does in a minute, not necessarily the speed of the outer race. If a yoyo spin one rpm that means the yoyo goes one full circle, and the bearing goes one full circle, regardless the size of the bearing. In case of a race track, one lap going wide vs one lap going inside is still the same one lap, regardless of the speed difference.
In the case of two identical yoyos with two bearings, A and C respectively, the A bearing one will have more kickback than the C when thrown because the string winding with the A bearing becomes smaller relative to the rim of the yoyo, usually translating to higher rpm. Just like how you change gears on bikes, smaller gear on the wheel will make pedaling heavier, but translates to higher rpm. This however isnât the problem.
The problem is we are comparing two bearings in case the yoyo is already spinning at certain rpm, letâs say 1000 rpm, and see if the dual bearing will slow them down less. Both the A and C bearing will have to spin cumulatively 1000 rpm because the yoyo is spinning at 1000 rpm. The question is, will they divide 1000 rpm equally, or will one bearing spin at nearly 1000 rpm and the other practically doesnât spin due to having higher friction (which means itâs useless). My answer is the latter. The yoyo will spin âthroughâ the least resistance possible, which is either the A bearing or the C bearing, not both.
1 Like
I know exactly what RPMâs are. Can be Revolutions, but it also applies to speed also. The race track analogy though, yes it is one lap, but the inside of the track you can complete that lap faster than you would if you just stayed on the outside. So yes one lap, but times (speed you complete the lap) will be different.
I agree with you, in your example Iâd say the latter as well. Which goes back to having a bearing in a bearing being pointless 
I think you and I are saying the same thing, Iâm just probably wording it wrong 