Re: General Motor Rules
 

I'm not trying to get one specific motor legalized and this thread isn't about stepper motors or brushless motors. The point is to make use of any comparable motors regardless of P/N. It has nothing to do with trying to obtain a marginal increase in power form an obscure motor. I am asking for the freedom to source and use similar motors at will. This has nothing to do with changing the allowed number of motors on a robot/total allowed power.

We already see teams short, stall, smoke, our current selection. We have snap action and main breakers, the motor will only have a 12V power source, and it's an 18ah lead acid battery. Thus regardless of the motor specs the electrical system will not allow more power output or current draw and won't pose more of a threat to the operators. If teams already burn out BB 550's what is the problem burning out a 550(ish) motor?

As for inspection, relax the restriction and base it off of simple criteria (like Adams idea). Don't change anything in the control or electrical system. You could even limit the motors to the 20 amp circuits like the custom circuit rules if that is a concern.

Re: General Motor Rules
 

And you'll get a new arms race of teams trying to source the most optimal (powerful, power density, power/weight ratio, whatever criteria you want) motor. Could be hard to find, or prohibitively expensive for lower resource teams to obtain; many of which won't even know the motor exists. This would just widen the already large disparity between the top and the bottom of FRC teams.

Re: General Motor Rules
 

It's a relatively bounded arms race though, as 500 and 700 sized motors only get so powerful at 12V.

Re: General Motor Rules
 

They do, but remember 2012? The superpowered FPs were so hard to find, and I remember a lot of teams complaining about the race to get those.

If anything, I would say allow motors by brand, and specifically allow a few different brands. That way the teams that needed could walk into their local hobby store and get some RC car motors, or a place like AM could sell specific ones that meet teams needs, such as the current 775 and 550.

Re: General Motor Rules
 

Yes they were, but comparably powerful 500 sized motors (with different part numbers) were readily available.

Re: General Motor Rules
 

Yes, but it gives a huge benefit to teams who can identify and source the most powerful motors in those series. My fear is that you'll have low resource teams limited to what's in the KoP and available from AM/VEX, while teams with mentors with industry experience will have a tangible power advantage. These teams already have many advantages as is (all well deserved), I don't see the need to make a rule change that will only widen a gap that much of our community is already concerned about. This is similar to the arms race that occurred with minibot battery chargers in 2011. Most teams just used the Tetrix chargers, while some teams used advanced chargers which allowed for a measurable difference in output speeds.

I love the simplicity of what you've proposed, but for me to get behind the issue, FIRST would need to identify a vendor which has a steady supply of motors in at least 75th percentile (perhaps much higher depending on the marginal power increase available around the 75th percentile) of power available in the form factor.

Re: General Motor Rules
 

Oh, I agree and don't see a big reason to change rules as currently the amount of COTS motors easily available is FAR better than even a few years ago. I'm moreso saying that if we do, this a reasonable direction to go (relatively constrained) as compared to checking total power, etc...

Tangentially related, we use the regular tetrix chargers like noobs in 2011...

Re: General Motor Rules
 

Wouldn't it then actually serve both goals to say: N Cims and an unlimited number of Bag, Mini CIM, and AM 9015 motors[1].

No team has an advantage in finding a better motor. Inspectors now only have 4 motors to identify. Simpler on teams, simpler on inspectors. No serious advantage to teams who can find a slightly better motor. All motors have a wide variety of COTS interface solutions (interfacing with the old FP gearboxes sucked) The only downside is I'd like to see a lower power motor added but we could open up servo limits (say 20W) and that would fill that need.


Course, I don't understand why we need MORE variety in motors.

[1] I picked a motor that's widely available from a supplier familiar with FIRST ordering and timelines.

Re: General Motor Rules
 

Won't SOMEBODY think of the poor little throttle motors?!?!

Re: General Motor Rules
 

Oh well, it was [not] worth a shot. While were at it how about going to 24V?

Re: General Motor Rules
 

By going to 24V you obsolete every current FRC motor.

Re: General Motor Rules
 

And a lot of the electrical system.

Re: General Motor Rules
 

No worries you just run all the appendages off of one large motor. The tank drive would use dog gears to reverse and disconnect power on each side and belts and shafts transmit torque to other parts of the robot. It'd work like a early factory or mill with one big steam engine in the basement and line shafts for power transmission.