![]() |
Team 95 2017 Build Thread
Starting early this year!
After the game reveal we considered what would be the most effective way to score points. Crude analysis below. ![]() We then brainstormed some ideas on how to play the game. I will not attempt to justify any of their names, and ran them through a weighted decision matrix to help us pick a design. ![]() Using these analyses we concluded that scoring GEARs and climbing would be the best way to generate points and thus deserve a high priority in our design and build efforts. A stunning conclusion for sure. :rolleyes: However, this game is quite well-designed. Focusing on GEARs and climbing will only enable winning if you are tremendously better than the opposing alliance because of the discrete, and increasingly difficult, gear scoring tiers. For example: an alliance that can deliver 11 GEARs cannot out-score an alliance that can only deliver 6 GEARs, all else being equal. So we concluded that we should have some capacity to score FUEL. Also, a stunning conclusion. We created a number of layout sketches, made prototype mechanisms, and evaluated these in the quite-restrictive sizing volume. It because obvious that scoring in the low FUEL goal would adversely affect our GEAR and climbing performance, so we have chosen to score FUEL in the high goal. We do not intend to focus volume, weight, or design effort on shooting as with the other two mechanisms. This will likely result in a low total scoring potential, but the idea with scoring FUEL in the high goal is merely to edge-out over an alliance that can score a similar number of gears. A small number of points should do the trick. With that, we have started to model our robot. I will post some screen shots of that soon. |
Re: Team 95 2017 Build Thread
Quote:
I wasn't clear that each line represents on 'trip' or one 'activity.' |
Re: Team 95 2017 Build Thread
First chunk of CAD work is done. We don't mind if you take inspiration (or copy) any piece of the design, just cite your source please! :)
![]() Still two major mechanical subsystems to go. |
Re: Team 95 2017 Build Thread
Thanks for doing this again. Your 2015 arm concept basically saved our season.
|
Re: Team 95 2017 Build Thread
Always happy to answer any questions people have, too.
Quote:
|
Re: Team 95 2017 Build Thread
Thanks for putting this thread together! It is my favorite thread of the season every year, best of luck!
|
Re: Team 95 2017 Build Thread
I see some 1.25"ish cylinders in each corner of that frame....are we looking to avoid being pushed around by lifting the whole robot?
|
Re: Team 95 2017 Build Thread
I'm playing the "figure out what that cylinder does" game right now, and I'm batting about 50%.
If I'm guess correctly, that's going to be a lot of air usage per cycle. |
Re: Team 95 2017 Build Thread
Quote:
And then the four in the corners of the chassis which are probably brakes. That's definitely a lot of air consumption, even if you're regulating down since most of those probably don't need 60psi. |
Re: Team 95 2017 Build Thread
Quote:
Quote:
So, it 2014 we had a robot with a similar air setup. 4x spring-return cylinders for brakes, 2x air cylinder ball shifters, and then eight(8) 3/4inx6in cylinders to actuate the four panels of the robot (see below). We used the 9% duty cycle Viair with a fan running over it (the fan is a TREMENDOUS help) and 6x of the small metallic Clippard tanks for storage. We didn't have any air consumption issues that year. For this year, we're looking at fewer air cylinders with shorter strokes (but similar bores) and hopefully a better compressor. I anticipate success! 2014 Robot: ![]() |
Re: Team 95 2017 Build Thread
I don't do a lot of linear mechanisms like it, but I'm mildly concerned about your 4 piston extend-o thing binding up the linear rods. The ratio of bearing distance to top-to-bottom distance seems dicey with the off-center placement, but looks like it should be inside the standard 2:1 ratio. The bearing distance to side-to-side distance definitely isn't 2:1, so you could have a problem there, though it'll help if the green bit is a little flexible.
With 4 pistons pushing like that, I think it'll move eventually once pressures equalize, but if one pressurizes sooner, it could bind things up until the others catch up sufficiently. Best make sure all the lines are the same length. |
Re: Team 95 2017 Build Thread
Quote:
|
Re: Team 95 2017 Build Thread
CAD continues to inch forward as we spool up to start fabrication this week.
![]() We've purchased the Tormach Tooling System collet and holders for our CNC knee mill. A nice little upgrade to take Z-height adjustments out of the equation. We have also decommissioned two old robots. We were running out of space to store them, and we will be scavenging parts from them to build a practice robot without breaking the bank (I hope). |
Re: Team 95 2017 Build Thread
Quote:
Just to catch the trackball? |
Re: Team 95 2017 Build Thread
I am curious about your brake system and effectiveness.
Are you just using 4 rubber stoppers and do you have any video of someone trying to push you in competition? |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 15:33. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi