![]() |
Re: Mechanum Wheel Sizes
Quote:
2) Mechanums are relatively easy to program. But, once you start putting gyros, encoders, etc. on(and you should, you will have problems driving straight otherwise), you then get a lot more complicated, vs the traction drive, where you really don't NEED any of those. 3) While mechanum may be easy to drive(it is basically Halo), you have to make a lot of compromises in strategy and build. You have to give up playing defense, and have to make sure you don't get into a pushing match while playing offense. Therefor, you must be a very good offensive robot, and it is STILL harder to drive, due to the fact that you have to avoid those situations. Furthermore, you must make some compromises in build. If you look at many of the successful swerve bots(just because better teams usually use swerve when they are looking for holonomic robots), all of them have made compromises in build. 148 in 2008 built a robot that was completely round. 118 built a robot in the same year that had a turret. 1717 from 2011 was very effective in the home zone, because they didn't have to turn much, but outside of the home zone, they were much less effective. |
Re: Mechanum Wheel Sizes
Allright, from what I read (assuming we chose mecanum), we should plan on using a semi-flexible frame that allows for the wheels to raise/lower a little based on terrain, should do most of our prototyping work during the off-season, and use 6" mecanum wheels (AM 6" HD?). Any other suggestions or things I forgot?
So, I suppose all that remains is to figure out how to turn these wheels. Any suggestions for the drive train? We currently only have the frame kit included with the 2012 Rookie KOP, which means 2 CIMs, chain, 4 sprockets, and two CIMple boxes. Would purchasing two more CIMple boxes with accompanying CIMs to use with the existing lengths of chain and sprockets work, or will we need to purchase entirely new drive train parts to make the robot move? (The rookie kit came with four jaguars, so we do have enough motor controllers for the four necessary motors.) And thanks to everyone for all of these awesome suggestions!:D EDIT: And plenty of practice to go with the new axis of travel! |
Re: Mechanum Wheel Sizes
Quote:
|
Re: Mechanum Wheel Sizes
Quote:
http://www.andymark.com/product-p/am-0688.htm http://www.andymark.com/product-p/am-0482.htm The 2nd one probably fits your idea of having a flexible frame for going over terrain. |
Re: Mechanum Wheel Sizes
Quote:
|
Re: Mechanum Wheel Sizes
Quote:
Having said all of this, and everything in my previous post... honestly, I agree with the people who suggest doing a kitbot on steroids (a nice 6WD robot) instead. It sucks when you can't climb an incline very well and other robots can shove you around at will. |
Re: Mechanum Wheel Sizes
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
There is no "h" in mecanum. |
Re: Mechanum Wheel Sizes
Quote:
|
Re: Mechanum Wheel Sizes
I still don't understand why everyone is interjecting about why NOT to use mecanum wheels, especially in the offseason. Just answer his questions, and move on. Too many opinions, not enough facts.
We used the kit frame, with cimple boxes to test 8" AM Mecanum wheels this year. It was too fast, the wheels spun a lot before actually gripping. Also, the robot would drift more because of the slipping. As I said, our final ratio was around 17.5:1, which gave us a great mix of speed and maneuverability. I would suggest going with the toughboxes, then a 2:1 sprocket or higher. Something like a 12 tooth on the box and 28 or 32 on the wheel. We used CIM's with Dewalt gearboxes. My suggestion is to just use the kit frame. Our test frame we just moved the inside rails to fit the wider mecanum wheels, then made new spacers. It's quick, easy, and readily available. It definetely flexes. While yes, it is necessary to have all 4 wheels on the ground, practice will help you the most. We didn't have trouble climbing and balances bridges, or running over the key. And I know there were teams crossing the bump with mecanum wheels. Someone else mentioned the programming. That's where we started with ours. |
Re: Mechanum Wheel Sizes
Quote:
In effect, the robot has no front. This is probably the most useful sensor to use for mecanum wheels. I'd strongly recommend it ahead of encoders and accelerometers. Also, as far as ramps and inclines go, mecanum wheels perform just fine. In 2006, our robot could climb the diamond plate ramp and get on the platform. In 2010, our robot could climb over the carpeted bump. In 2012, our robot could climb on the bridge. Right now is the time to experiment with drive trains. If you have the time and the money, try building a 6 wheel drive and build a mecanum drive. Learn how to use gyros, accelerometers, and optical encoders. Figure out how to do a good job building each, and experience the strengths and weaknesses of both. Then, when it comes time to pick a drive train, you won't be second guessing yourself. |
Re: Mechanum Wheel Sizes
Quote:
Although, we may just end up having a more traditional robot with a front and back. The field centric drive and encoder-based correction sounds more like something to do when we have had more experience with mecanum. I think that four motors with mecanum wheels would be a good starting point, and simply adjust for the lack of a perfect straight line by hand. |
Re: Mechanum Wheel Sizes
Convert your joystick inputs into an angle and a magnitude. Add or subtract the gyro angle. Convert to wheel speeds.
About as simple as it gets. |
Re: Mechanum Wheel Sizes
Quote:
|
Re: Mechanum Wheel Sizes
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Mechanum Wheel Sizes
Quote:
Thanks, though!! |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:05. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi