Chief Delphi

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   Extra Discussion (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=68)
-   -   pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125419)

Madison 29-01-2014 06:44

pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 

Jimmy Nichols 29-01-2014 06:44

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
how are you actuating the unit?

Blackphantom91 29-01-2014 11:40

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
These are really nice. I am assuming that you are actuating the entire pod due to the mounting holes. Cant wait to see it in action. Very nice work.

Madison 29-01-2014 11:47

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 


The highlighted bracket is attached to a 1.5" bore, 1.5" stroke cylinder. There is one cylinder for each pod. It pushes on a 3/8" bolt that will be located on the right side of the pod shown above.

The pivot is on the far left of the pod, behind the mecanum wheel.

magnets 29-01-2014 15:44

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
This is really nice. In terms of design/simplicity, it's the best ocotocanum I've ever seen.

AllenGregoryIV 29-01-2014 15:51

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Madison, out of curiosity what is your change in ground clearance from Mecanum to traction?

Madison 29-01-2014 16:01

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
There's about 1/2" of clearance.

pfreivald 30-01-2014 09:07

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
That looks delightfully compact and sleek!

Curious: Why did you go with 4" mecanum wheels? Is it just a weight/compactness issue? Our octocanum switches from 6" mecanum (with a .75" sprocket) to 2" colsons (with a 1 7/8" sprocket!) to get the lowest gear reduction possible without an additional shifter.

Also, are you actuating all four cylinders from a single valve? If so, how fast is the switch?

Thanks!

Madison 30-01-2014 12:19

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pfreivald (Post 1334688)
That looks delightfully compact and sleek!

Curious: Why did you go with 4" mecanum wheels? Is it just a weight/compactness issue? Our octocanum switches from 6" mecanum (with a .75" sprocket) to 2" colsons (with a 1 7/8" sprocket!) to get the lowest gear reduction possible without an additional shifter.

Also, are you actuating all four cylinders from a single valve? If so, how fast is the switch?

Thanks!

It was entirely about making the modules as compact as possible. Not much additional thought went into the decision beyond that.

We haven't decided yet if we're going to actuate all four cylinders together through a single valve or give them each (or in pairs) a valve to increase air flow. We'll probably try it both ways and, if there's no really compelling reason for the added airflow, use a single valve.

pfreivald 30-01-2014 12:23

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Madison (Post 1334795)
It was entirely about making the modules as compact as possible. Not much additional thought went into the decision beyond that.

We haven't decided yet if we're going to actuate all four cylinders together through a single valve or give them each (or in pairs) a valve to increase air flow. We'll probably try it both ways and, if there's no really compelling reason for the added airflow, use a single valve.

Fair enough. May I ask what each pod weighs, with motors and wheels?

Madison 30-01-2014 12:29

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pfreivald (Post 1334801)
Fair enough. May I ask what each pod weighs, with motors and wheels?

Solidworks says they're 5.75 lbs. each.

pfreivald 30-01-2014 12:37

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Madison (Post 1334808)
Solidworks says they're 5.75 lbs. each.

Okay, so you're about 1.5 lbs lighter than us, per pod, but (I think?) we have a greater gear reduction (7x) when switching to traction mode.

Thanks for sharing--it's always neat to see other teams' take on the same basic functionality.

Madison 30-01-2014 13:39

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pfreivald (Post 1334814)
Okay, so you're about 1.5 lbs lighter than us, per pod, but (I think?) we have a greater gear reduction (7x) when switching to traction mode.

Thanks for sharing--it's always neat to see other teams' take on the same basic functionality.

Yeah -- our low gear reduction is "only" 2.92:1 lower than the mecanum wheel and 17.52:1 overall.

Bryce2471 30-01-2014 13:45

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Very cool design, I hope to see it in competition.
Quote:

Solidworks says they're 5.75 lbs. each.
Just curious, does that weight include the mounting bracket(s) and pneumatic cylinders?

Madison 30-01-2014 13:58

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryce2471 (Post 1334853)
Very cool design, I hope to see it in competition.

Just curious, does that weight include the mounting bracket(s) and pneumatic cylinders?

It does not. They are integrated into the frame, so I don't know what they weigh individually. I'll take a look at that when I can get at Solidworks again later tonight.

Aren_Hill 30-01-2014 14:24

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Madison (Post 1334808)
Solidworks says they're 5.75 lbs. each.

I'd be quite surprised if whats pictured is that heavy, my butterfly module from last year was 2.38lbs with very little effort in regards to weight. From the looks of it there isn't much more here.

-Aren

AdamHeard 30-01-2014 14:29

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Aren_Hill (Post 1334877)
I'd be quite surprised if whats pictured is that heavy, my butterfly module from last year was 2.38lbs with very little effort in regards to weight. From the looks of it there isn't much more here.

-Aren

We really wanted to run a octonum variant of this above module but it didn't match what we wanted to do with the game.

It would have been insanely clean. If anyone hasn't seen Aren's butterfly (which we ripped off), it's hand downs the cleanest setup anyone has run by a huge margin. That's why we stole it ;)

Electronica1 30-01-2014 14:32

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Aren_Hill (Post 1334877)
I'd be quite surprised if whats pictured is that heavy, my butterfly module from last year was 2.38lbs with very little effort in regards to weight. From the looks of it there isn't much more here.

-Aren

I think that weight included motors (and the weight you listed is lighter than one cim so i know the weight you listed does not include a motor).

Madison 30-01-2014 14:56

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Electronica1 (Post 1334885)
I think that weight included motors (and the weight you listed is lighter than one cim so i know the weight you listed does not include a motor).

Yes -- the 5.75 lbs. does include the weight of a CIM motor (which I have entered as 2.8 lbs.).

wireties 30-01-2014 15:14

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
It is interesting and instructive to see the evolution of your drive from year-to-year. It is clever and well done. Good luck this year!

Bryce2471 30-01-2014 15:47

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
I'm also curious why you decided to run your belt and gears on the same side of the mecanum wheel. It seems like if you ran the belt on the other side of the module, then your traction mode would have a wider wheel base and the cim shaft would take less side load. I'm sure you have good reasoning for why the module is made this way. I'm just curious to see what your thinking was.

AllenGregoryIV 30-01-2014 15:50

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pfreivald (Post 1334814)
Okay, so you're about 1.5 lbs lighter than us, per pod, but (I think?) we have a greater gear reduction (7x) when switching to traction mode.

Thanks for sharing--it's always neat to see other teams' take on the same basic functionality.

Why such a low gear reduction, seems like 488's will be traction limited.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryce2471 (Post 1334922)
I'm also curious why you decided to run your belt and gears on the same side of the mecanum wheel. It seems like if you ran the belt on the other side of the module, then your traction mode would have a wider wheel base and the cim shaft would take less side load. I'm sure you have good reasoning for why the module is made this way. I'm just curious to see what your thinking was.

I would guess it is so that they don't have to cut the CIM shafts, if you run them normally the end of the shaft hits the mecanum wheel.

Answer42 30-01-2014 15:50

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamHeard (Post 1334879)
We really wanted to run a octonum variant of this above module but it didn't match what we wanted to do with the game.

It would have been insanely clean. If anyone hasn't seen Aren's butterfly (which we ripped off), it's hand downs the cleanest setup anyone has run by a huge margin. That's why we stole it ;)

Would you mind posting a pic of it? I'm curious now.

AllenGregoryIV 30-01-2014 15:53

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Answer42 (Post 1334925)
Would you mind posting a pic of it? I'm curious now.

They have a website with a really good description.
http://www.teamneutrino.org/seasons/...bot/butterfly/

Our octocanum modules this year were heavily inspired by team neutino's work.

AdamHeard 30-01-2014 15:57

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AllenGregoryIV (Post 1334927)
They have a website with a really good description.
http://www.teamneutrino.org/seasons/...bot/butterfly/

Our octocanum modules this year were heavily inspired by team neutino's work.

This then nest in a single 2x3 (for us) or 3x3 (for them) tube which is also your frame. Real clean.

It's the lightest cleanest butterfly (that could be an octonum if hte tube was 4" wide) that anyone has done.

Answer42 30-01-2014 16:10

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamHeard (Post 1334932)
This then nest in a single 2x3 (for us) or 3x3 (for them) tube which is also your frame. Real clean.

It's the lightest cleanest butterfly (that could be an octonum if hte tube was 4" wide) that anyone has done.

Very elegant. I'll definitely remember that one.

pfreivald 30-01-2014 17:39

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AllenGregoryIV (Post 1334924)
Why such a low gear reduction, seems like 488's will be traction limited.

We're still playing with wheels to maximize our traction. :)

Trent B 30-01-2014 23:29

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Aren_Hill (Post 1334877)
I'd be quite surprised if whats pictured is that heavy, my butterfly module from last year was 2.38lbs with very little effort in regards to weight. From the looks of it there isn't much more here.

-Aren

The solid 0.4lb Delrin wheel was definitely not doing it any favors with regards to weight.

RobotDoktor 31-01-2014 23:09

Re: pic: FRC488 - 2014 Octocanum Pod - Top
 
Nice. I really like how compact the modules are. Ours are a lot longer, but we have 6" mecanums and 4x2 Colsons.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:52.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi