Answers.Body: <p>I'd address this with bevel gears:</p>
  <p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/TN1cw.png" rel="noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/TN1cw.png" alt="enter image description here" /></a></p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-03-04T21:47:43.833Z
Answers.Text: Interesting. What are the advantages/disadvantages to bevel gears over a solution closer to OPs original design (such as [Alex’s solution](https://bricks.stackexchange.com/a/16971/11214))?
Answers.UserDisplayName: DukeSilver
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-03-04T22:15:29.750Z
Answers.Text: More symmetric solution, avoidance of the 8 tooth gears (which Alex also indicated don't bear load/speed well), less backlash (or at least the backlash distributed symmetrically over the resulting axles). Not knowing OP's further design intentions my solution might of might not fit better, but at least OP now has an alternative option.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Michael Verschaeve
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-03-05T07:57:34.567Z
Answers.Text: It also has an advantage of being already well braced. And for some reason I have a suspicion it may even have less friction.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Alex
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-03-09T03:31:51.753Z
Answers.Text: If size is an issue, you could use a 7L beam if you removed the outer two black frames, and replace outer two tan bevel gears with double bevels.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Matthew Jensen
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-03-09T04:36:12.417Z
Answers.Text: @Matthew, not sure what you mean, but I would imagine such solution has poorly braced gears
Answers.UserDisplayName: Michael Verschaeve
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-03-10T03:52:51.710Z
Answers.Text: My mistake, you are right, I forgot about the torque...
Answers.UserDisplayName: Matthew Jensen
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-03-03T21:40:36.467Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2022-03-03T21:40:36.467Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Michael Verschaeve
Answers.Body: <p>Something like this would work. Since this is just an idea pictured assembly doesn't feature any bracing required for this solution to work properly. Another thing to mention - 8T gears doesn't like high load (both torque and rotational speed), so keep that in mind as well. Axle in the middle has been added just to show it is connecting 8T gear with 16T below.</p>
  <p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/r9vae.png" rel="noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/r9vae.png" alt="Assembly with 8T gears" /></a></p>
  <p>To minimize wear on the 8T gears, consider replacing the with 24T gears (if they fit inside your model), like so:</p>
  <p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/om2Wt.png" rel="noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/om2Wt.png" alt="Assembly with 24T gears" /></a></p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-03-03T15:04:53.283Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2022-03-04T23:13:43.510Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2022-03-04T23:13:43.510Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Alex
Body: <p>Can you give me some advice how to make it so motor will be in the middle, but at the same time keep the functionality of the 2 axles on the sides? It can go further up if necessary.</p>
  <p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/W1nP4.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/W1nP4.png" alt="motor configuration" /></a></p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-03-03T14:47:24.733Z
Comments.Text: Can you confirm two conditions please: 1) should each axle rotate in different directions? 2) should axles spin at the same speed?
Comments.UserDisplayName: Alex
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-03-03T14:51:59.060Z
Comments.Text: Yes, that's corrrect
Comments.UserDisplayName: Neikar
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-03-03T15:15:08.713Z
Comments.Text: Just an observation. I hope you've used blue pin to attach gear just as a placeholder in your picture. This won't work well with real bricks, even with frictionless pin. It is better to use an axle instead, braced with liftarm/beams from both sides.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Alex
Tags: <technic><gears>
Title: How can I place a motor in the middle of a Technic beam with an odd number of holes?
UserDisplayName: Neikar
ThreadText: # How can I place a motor in the middle of a Technic beam with an odd number of holes?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2022-03-03)
  
  Can you give me some advice how to make it so motor will be in the middle, but at the same time keep the functionality of the 2 axles on the sides? It can go further up if necessary.
  
  [![motor configuration](https://i.sstatic.net/W1nP4.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/W1nP4.png)
  
  **Tags:** technic, gears
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: Can you confirm two conditions please: 1) should each axle rotate in different directions? 2) should axles spin at the same speed?  
  > **username_0**: Yes, that's corrrect  
  > **username_1**: Just an observation. I hope you've used blue pin to attach gear just as a placeholder in your picture. This won't work well with real bricks, even with frictionless pin. It is better to use an axle instead, braced with liftarm/beams from both sides.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 2 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2022-03-03. Score: 18 | Accepted answer
  
  Something like this would work. Since this is just an idea pictured assembly doesn't feature any bracing required for this solution to work properly. Another thing to mention - 8T gears doesn't like high load (both torque and rotational speed), so keep that in mind as well. Axle in the middle has been added just to show it is connecting 8T gear with 16T below.
  
  [![Assembly with 8T gears](https://i.sstatic.net/r9vae.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/r9vae.png)
  
  To minimize wear on the 8T gears, consider replacing the with 24T gears (if they fit inside your model), like so:
  
  [![Assembly with 24T gears](https://i.sstatic.net/om2Wt.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/om2Wt.png)
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_2 on 2022-03-03. Score: 19
  
  I'd address this with bevel gears:
  
  [![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/TN1cw.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/TN1cw.png)
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_3**: Interesting. What are the advantages/disadvantages to bevel gears over a solution closer to OPs original design (such as [username_1’s solution](https://bricks.stackexchange.com/a/16971/11214))?  
  > **username_2**: More symmetric solution, avoidance of the 8 tooth gears (which username_1 also indicated don't bear load/speed well), less backlash (or at least the backlash distributed symmetrically over the resulting axles). Not knowing OP's further design intentions my solution might of might not fit better, but at least OP now has an alternative option.  
  > **username_1**: It also has an advantage of being already well braced. And for some reason I have a suspicion it may even have less friction.  
  > **username_4**: If size is an issue, you could use a 7L beam if you removed the outer two black frames, and replace outer two tan bevel gears with double bevels.  
  > **username_2**: @username_4, not sure what you mean, but I would imagine such solution has poorly braced gears  
  > **username_4**: My mistake, you are right, I forgot about the torque...  
  
  ---
  
  