Re: Average Feet per Second
 

Maybe you're thinking of the midlevel gear we ran at MMR, which was around 6 or 7 FPS. I was referring to the "overdrive" gear, which we didn't use until late in the season. It was theoretically 13 FPS. In practice it was less than that, as we found when we clocked it in the 10-11 FPS range in some testing last summer. It was quite a bit more than 6, for sure. Are you sure you have your numbers right?

Re: Average Feet per Second
 

This year we should be around 11fps in high and 3fps in low.

Re: Average Feet per Second
 

hopefully about 13 or 14 in high, 7 to 8 in low

Re: Average Feet per Second
 

Lets see Output of the Gearbox last year at 1600 RPM Max, reduced 3:1 into a 5" Pulley with treads gives us in the neighborhood of 8368 Inches/Min = 11.6 ft/sec in high (Just under 3 in low) and there were only a few robots that could stay with us in real life speed.

Re: Average Feet per Second
 

the drills work out pretty well,

last year we had 160 (inches or foot !?) pounds of torque on 494's dyno with 6-8 fps.

in high we had 10 fps with an untested torque in high because we broke it's 1/4 inch steel keyway with the amount of torque we put on it in low speeed

sorry guys on 494!

Re: Average Feet per Second
 

SigmaC@T runs two speeds, with high being around 10-14 fps and low being around 2-4 fps. [Drill and Atwoods]

Re: Average Feet per Second
 

116's gearbox output is theoretically 627 rpm in high and 179 rpm in low. With the 12" wheels, geared down ~1:3.33, gives you 9.85 ft/s in high and ~2.82 ft/s in low. We are unsure if this is the ratio we are going to use, but the one we do use will be somewhat close to it.

Re: Average Feet per Second
 

if your looking at the free speeds if the moters, the actual FPS will be MUCH lower. Last year we calculated our robot to run about 60 fps. in all reality it wa about 15. ( i might add it was REALLY ineffecient)

Re: Average Feet per Second
 

adding a load due to the motors, such as being used to drive the rest of the bot around, will slow the motors down, and quite a bit too. That's just due to the fact that there is mass that the motor has to repel, which takes away from the net force that is exerted from the motor. Acceleration thus is affected, which affects the whole speed of the robot, thus slowing the whole robot down.

Re: Average Feet per Second
 

Maybe those lost 2-3 fps were spent compensating for driving your casters backwards :D

(I'm just teasing Jeff - nothing like a good technical debate).

Re: Average Feet per Second
 

For the Technokats this year, we tested our gearbox for the "Software Bot"(new this year) using 4 CIMs(all we could find in preseason) using a new, reduced gearbox and got about 16 fps in high and 10 fps in low.