Re: 610 Presents: Stingray
 

Lol. That's just awesome. If that's the inspiration, I think you'd have to nickname a flamboyant blocker "the flounder". :D

Re: 610 Presents: Stingray
 

You team has a very, very thorough design process.

Now, I wish even more to have hiring and firing authority...

Re: 610 Presents: Stingray
 

One thing I noticed watching this video again that's one of those "why didn't I think of that?" moments? 610 has angled their camera, knowing that they only need to look quickly at one side of the driverstation to know which side is hot.

Re: 610 Presents: Stingray
 

Can you talk about the process behind making that decision? 610 was very successful running CAN in the past, I'm curious why you would leave it.

Re: 610 Presents: Stingray
 

I'm not the best person to answer this question, but my understanding is we moved away from Jaguars because they are huge, and we weren't happy with the built in PID implementation, so there was little incentive to use them. Last year the programmers got much better speed control doing it in software.

Re: 610 Presents: Stingray
 

Great robot as always guys!

Does anyone happen to know what springs your using on your shooter?

Thanks

Re: 610 Presents: Stingray
 

Jaguars are huge in comparison to Victors/Talons. They also seem to be less robust when it comes to surviving the harsh environment of metal shavings we put them through.

Really, the only thing they have going for them is the CAN bus. For 2014's game? Many robots are cramped for space.

Re: 610 Presents: Stingray
 

Mcmaster carr part number 9654k424 and 94135k62. One of each per side. We have talked about boosting the power a bit, but the shock loading on the catapult has already required redesign of several components to handle the stress. We'll probably play it safe for our first regional.

Re: 610 Presents: Stingray
 

I know you guys like to gear your drive conservatively(especially compared to many west coast teams). What did you settle on this year?

Re: 610 Presents: Stingray
 

We're running 5:1 in the gearbox and ~2:1 in the drive rails (24t driving 50t) for an overall of 10.4:1. On 5" wheels this ratio works out to be very similar to last year's 8:1 on 4" wheels.

Re: 610 Presents: Stingray
 

Did you have any methods in place to reduce the risk of tripping the main breaker, such as turning off 2 CIMs, or having the driver back off during pushing, or were you just geared low enough for it not to be an issue? This is a question for both your 2013 and 2014 robots.

Why did you decide on 4 CIM 2 MiniCIM this year as opposed to your 6 CIM last year?

Re: 610 Presents: Stingray
 

As far as I know there was no code action in place to reduce the risk of tripping the main breaker. I can also guarantee the driver never backed off pushing for fear of tripping the main breaker ;). I see queries regarding 6 CIMs and the main breaker all the time but I can honestly say I have never experienced current-related main breaker problems. I'm just guessing our conservative gearing has helped us avoid these issues. I can't speak fully for the 2013 driver but I'm guessing 2013 is a similar story.

This isn't a very good reason but here goes: We only had 4 CIMs that looked up to our standards in our little box o' CIMs so we figured we would just skip the ones with slightly damaged leads and use Mini CIMs instead because why take chances? On the product page it says they can be used interchangeably so we took that and ran with it. We ended up swapping the Mini CIMs with full-size CIMs on bag day night though so I can't comment on how well CIMs + MiniCIMs play together in competition. No gripes about it during practice at least.