Re: pic: GBX-150, CIM-mounted swerve
 

Nice design. You even have the weight of the robot pinning the steering bearing into the wheel module and the mounting plate. Others have hung the weight of the robot off the screws on the edge of the bearing which is a no-no. I don't like relying on screws that aren't seated fully like the ones you have on the main steering bearing but since you aren't holding the weight of the robot off them it should be fine. I would use stripper bolts or machined tabs but with a little loc-tite the screws shouldn't be an issue. Plus they are very close to the main plate and if one came loose it could lockup your steering for a match or burn out a steering motor.

The answer to your problem of mounting the CIM to the main plate is easy.
Flange the motor/bearing adapter (plate between the CIM and steering bearing), and make that flange larger than the hole in the main plate, assemble the whole steering module and slide the whole thing up into the plate until the flange contacts the main plate. Then you can clamp on the minor OD of the adapter instead of the CIM or bolt the flange to the main plate (my preference). If I am seeing everything correctly you should be fine. It will add a 1/4" to the overall height but that shouldn't be an issue.

One thing we've found is when the steering gear is smaller in diameter like this, the backlash in the steering gear to steering gearbox and within the Versa Gearbox, you get a decent amount of steering backlash. We are going to belt steering over gears due to this. Modifying a steering gear is simpler and easier, but for autonomous routines a low backlash steering helps a lot.

Awesome new evolution of the type of co-axial setup Aren started a couple of years back where the bevel gear is on the wheel axle. Though it looks like you're using a tiny 1/2" x 2" wheel, that could also be part of the compact look. Our 2015 1"x3.25" wheels looked laughably small.

Re: pic: GBX-150, CIM-mounted swerve
 

Thank you! I've never really liked using the screws partially to capture things, but other solutions require so much more machining or cost I don't like to use them. Fortunately most of the time they don't support any load anyway.
I actually came up with the idea for using a bevel-beside-wheel before it came up on CD, but my execution was nowhere near the finesse that Aren's (or 1323's) had.

I see what you mean about mounting the CIM; I realized that after I already did the render. The method you're describing is a little different from what I had in mind, however. I was just going to replace the clamp with a plate that goes beneath the CIM to mount to.

I really dislike using things like large timing pulleys for this (I've done it a couple times), but I completely see your point about why to do it. Usually for autonomous I've had experience just using a NavX for guidance, and I don't think you need complicated swerve maneuvers for auton anyway, but I can think of several autonomous problems that are harder to solve here.

Now I'm getting paranoid about the small wheel. :P I remember that nitrile tread not wearing out for around 25 matches + practice + offseason back in 2014, but the AM treads wears out a lot faster iirc. I wouldn't think that tread wear increases exponentially over a lower width + diameter (in this case 4x faster assuming it's a linear relationship), but please correct me if I'm wrong. ATM I can live with 4x faster tread wear.

Re: pic: GBX-150, CIM-mounted swerve
 

I revamped some of it using some of the suggestions, and finally got it under 5lbs! (4.99lbs, to be exact) I've been trying to do that for two years, and this is definitely less sketchy than some of my other attempts.
The top support clamps onto the CIM with set screws, but the bottom uses a plate to support the CIM and directly interfaces with the bearing. It's a much stronger connection. I also upgraded to a 30t gear over a 24t gear for the turning gear to reduce the backlash a bit.
That being said, I'm still not sure I would use this for most competitions, or at least not without a couple extra pieces. The most sketchy part is that I had to resort to using a press fit to hold the large bearing in the gear. The thrust loads are all opposite the press fit, so theoretically this is 100% ok, but we all know how theoryland is deceiving.
The most dangerous parts of this are the small bevel gear shaft bearings, and the press fit. Everything else I feel fairly comfortable with.

Re: pic: GBX-150, CIM-mounted swerve
 

Very cool! And thanks for sharing the native SolidWorks files. I'm very interested in working across teams and iterating on each others designs.

I look forward to seeing video if/when you build & test it!

Re: pic: GBX-150, CIM-mounted swerve
 

I always love seeing your designs.; they are the reason I taught myself CAD so Icoukd aspire to make stuff like you do. A sub 5lb swerve module is an amazing accomplishment! I have a few questions:

1. How is the small bevel cluster shaft being held in (on the top and bottom)? I see there's something under the small bevel gear but I don't see what it is.

2. Unless it's an interference fit, I could imagine a scenario where the robot rides up on a field obstacle or another robot and the gear gets pulled off the large bearing. In your first version of 150 you have screw holding the gear and bearing together. Did you remove them for weight savings or was there another reason?

3. Is there an encoder on the CIM that I can't see? I though that was usually a requirement for swerve.

Re: pic: GBX-150, CIM-mounted swerve
 

1. There is a 5mm bearing in the fork, and a 9mm bearing up on top. Gratuitous use of fillets in the corners might save it from shearing, along with the use of a steel shaft and lower loads. That being said if I did it again I would switch to 3/8" wide forks and use a 6mm or 7mm bearing.

2. I sort of see what you're getting at, but short of 2016 obstacles I can't think of another field or situation that would cause that much odd loading. Cyclic loading of some kind might work it loose, but probably not in a single match or even several matches. The amount of force required to dislodge a press fit or loctite in one go is way more that you'd expect.

3. There is not an encoder; I couldn't find space. I know teams have done swerve without encoders on the drive motors before, but I don't particularly like it.
I removed the screws due to an interference with the versaplanetary and the screw heads. looking back on it, I think I could have at least put some set screws on the gear to hold the bearing in place.

Re: pic: GBX-150, CIM-mounted swerve
 

So is the wheel you're using COTS or is that one of the CNC'd plates?
What size are the bevel gears, and where do you plan to source them?

Edit: What size gear are you using for the large steering gear?

Re: pic: GBX-150, CIM-mounted swerve
 

3D printed wheel (I did not make that parts list correctly... there's probably more on there that's not COTS, like the modifications to the bevel gears).
Bevel gears are the QTCgears 15 tooth and 30 tooth 1.5 module gears, available from SDP-SI. However, I was looking at using gear just from Ebay/AliExpress for the price, or the Boston Gear 16t and 32p 16 pitch gears. The design should work with any of those, as the dimensions are not too horribly different.
Large steering gear is a 64 tooth Vex gear in GBX-150, and 60 tooth in GBX-151.