Talk:Actuator

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Engineering (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Electrical engineering (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electrical engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electrical engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Non-mechanical POV[edit]

This article is obviously written from a non-mechanical point of view. "Actuator" means many more detailed things in mechanical engineering that should be prominently discussed in this article. See this link and this link.


Absolutely agree 75.157.45.243 (talk) 20:22, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Bolt and Screw Clarification[edit]

With regard to the phrase "bolt and screw transducer", I wondered whether this should read "nut and bolt transducer", since in order to obtain linear motion there needs to be something moving along the bolt (or screw), and usually that's a nut (attached to an object). As the bolt or screw turns, so the nut moves along the thread (backwards or forwards, depending on the direction in which the bolt or screw is turning, and the "handedness" of the thread). AncientBrit 23:40, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Are you kidding me! Who cares about this stuff seriously.

Diagram[edit]

How does the diagram in the article complement the article at all? The article defines an actuator as something an agent can use to act on the environment, such as arms, robotic pincers, etc. The diagram just shows a spring curling and uncurling. There is no explanation of how it is moving, what the agent is that is doing the moving, why it's labeled an actuator, or anything at all to show how it's relevant to the article.

I think either an attempt needs to be made to tie the diagram in with the article, or the diagram should be removed as unhelpful. 199 (talk) 19:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Intelligent Agents[edit]

Embodied intelligent agents (i.e. physical robots being driven by an "intelligent" program) *have* actuators but *are not* actuators. A robot may have a motor (an actuator) for lifting something or moving around. However, the robot itself is not an actuator. -- cmhTC 15:31, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

i think its a load of crap —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.32.28.194 (talk) 13:43, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Are Pumps Actuators?[edit]

Is a pump an actuator? It would seem to fit the definition ("It is operated by a source of energy, usually in the form of an electric current, hydraulic fluid pressure or pneumatic pressure, and converts that energy into some kind of motion.") in that it takes a source of energy and converts it into motion of the pumped fluid. --Rhkramer (talk) 17:25, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

My understanding is that a pump uses actuators such as motors to move the fluid, but the pump itself would not be considered an actuator. 138.16.21.199 (talk) 16:54, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Wall of text[edit]

The wall of text/non-NPOV in the Examples and applications section is so poorly formatted and written so much like a tutorial (which doesn't even make sense given the subject matter) that it feels more like the disjointed ramblings of a vagrant than an actual treatise on the subject. Every time I think about tackling it for formatting and comprehensibility I get so discombobulated I stumble around confused for a few moments before becoming aware of reality again. It's really that awful. Are there any engineers (I am not an engineer) who are willing to dive into this who aren't trying to write what they think it is or how they believe it should be explained to a layman, and rather say plainly what it simply is with regards to mechanical engineering? --Jtgibson (talk) 01:14, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

What does this mean?[edit]

Quote: "Pneumatic energy is desirable for main engine controls because it can quickly respond in starting and stopping as the power source does not need to be stored in reserve for operation". This does not make sense to me. Any pneumatic device needs an air reservoir to function. Biscuittin (talk) 21:26, 26 February 2014 (UTC)