Re: 1726 Prototype Testing
 

We hold the cylinders at 3in by using the weight of the ball combined with the piece (not yet built) which holds down the ball. Because of the geometry of the catapult it takes very little force to hold it down, but increases exponentially when released.

We are trying to cut down air usage and have been somewhat successful. Almost all of our cylinders are now single action instead of double action. By doing this we have cut air consumption for one shot from about 115-70 to 115-90 psi drop on four tanks (about 15 sec recharge time). If we start with the tanks precharged we should be able to get through a match without too much trouble.

On a side note does anyone know if it's possible to design a pressure readout display for the OI. I think that would be immensely helpful this year.

Re: 1726 Prototype Testing
 

Shift? what shift?

From what I understand they didn't optimize the shooting system at all; it really only needs to fill the initial 3", not all 10". That should save a ton of air for the other tasks.

Re: 1726 Prototype Testing
 

we also accidentally managed to land the trackball on the overpass:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3oHbSovZjA

it's actually pretty easy with a catapult!

Re: 1726 Prototype Testing
 

Awesome Job.

very impressive !

Re: 1726 Prototype Testing
 

These guys have been concerned with the safety issue of stored energy. Their design makes every attempt to minimize the risk of injury. Most notable they do not use a latching mechanism. If I was an inspector, I would probable let this go. Some of the other designs I've seen are too risky and If I were the inspector would not allow to compete. I'm pessimistic. Who Knows what the inspectors will say. The GDC has not been black and white on this. A ball can be launch with a minimal risk device. Come on teams keep thinking. It can be done.

Re: 1726 Prototype Testing
 

You guys are awesome! Great Job! Great idea!!!

Re: 1726 Prototype Testing
 

That's outrageous. Looks great.

Re: 1726 Prototype Testing
 

First of all... wow. We spent the first couple weeks planning to lift, until we got fed up with the 80" cylinder, then said "what the heck" and started putting together launch prototypes last week. We managed to get the ball onto the overpass using two 1.5 x 8" cylinders... but without any preload. The only catch was that we used the 120psi feed from the shop compressor, so it was back to the drawing board. This weekend involved sitting around with the calculator, spreadsheet, and a demo copy of Working Model to calculate what we'd need to do it with 1.5x8" cylinders as... for some reason... we have five of them kicking around the shop. Lo and behold, the calculations came out very close to your observations. Thanks!

Now, perhaps, I can return the favour, by suggesting that the device you are looking for is called a "pressure transducer" and that a quick search of the forums here brings up a link to here where you can see a picture of one that was apparently in the 2006 KOP. It's possible you have one sitting in your shop and don't know of it!

As for sending the data back and displaying it, I suspect your programming team is on top of how to send it, and perhaps someone is building a custom dashboard in labview?

Thanks again... I feel so much more confident with our design knowing that our calculations are not entirely off-base!

Jason

Re: 1726 Prototype Testing
 

Thanks for the tip Jason, but I looked thru the 2006 KOP checklist and I do not see that transducer listed. I sure don't recall ever seeing it in my many diggings thru the pneumatic parts bin either. Maybe it is just something that was used the year before, and not in 2006, and got left in the manual? notice the page on your link shows that it's from 2005 and then relabeled 2006 at the very top

Re: 1726 Prototype Testing
 

Hi Jim! I thought I'd seen that launcher design before... I never clued in to this being your team:confused: ! Great job.

You've got me looking around for the a place that sells the pressure transducer now, as I'm pretty sure we've got one in the shop, but if it isn't COTS any more, then I guess that is where it is going to be staying. A bit of a pain, as they seem to run about $100 or so, but here's one that I found at digikey that might do the trick.

http://search.digikey.com/scripts/Dk...e=MSP3251P1-ND

Note that I've never actually used the transducer before, so I can't say for sure that this is exactly what you need... I just remember one being in the KOP some years ago and having it sit around on the shelf and thinking hmmm.... we've got to use that one of these years.

Jason

Re: 1726 Prototype Testing
 

Thank you very much for the help Jason. There has been a lively discussion of this on our team forum and the other option which has been considered is the use of several pressure switches to provide a general idea of where the pressure is (one at 20psi, one at 60psi etc.). Either way it's an interesting problem. Do you plan on using all five of your 1.5*8" cylinders?

Re: 1726 Prototype Testing
 

No, no... thank YOU! We had the calculations all done to SAY it would work, and we had some preliminary test data that matched our calculations... but given my marks in thermo and fluids 20 years ago in university, there was... well... probably close to a 50% chance we were wrong (hopefully I've got better since)! As you have been kind enough to share your results, when I compare your observations to what my model predicts (and the demo version of working model won't let me save.. fair enough... or I'd post it here) it validates the model. We will be building this week with far more confidence!

As for the transducers, some digging around on the web shows that T.I. Instruments is now www.sensata.com Unfortunately they don't show a 5cp3-7 sensor in their product line, but I've dropped them an e-mail to ask if there is a derived or evolved version of it, or perhaps they just changed the part number, which should make it a legal COTS item. I will try to remember to report back here if I find anything useful.

Jason

EDIT: The plan is to design for five of the cylinders, then cut back if we can, either by dialling the regulator back, or dropping one cylinder. The idea behind using more of the smaller cylinders (besides the fact that we've got them...) is that gives us five "tubes" of airflow to keep the pressure up throughout the stroke, while with a larger diameter cylinder we would only have two, or perhaps three. Not that this appears to be a problem. We are also considering setting up the system as Two clippards --- Regulator ---- Valve ----- Two Clippards ---- Cylinders so that there is no bottle neck due to the valve. This will hopefully reduce the amount of pre-load we need, and allowing us to maximize the useful stroke of the 8" cylinders.

Re: 1726 Prototype Testing
 

I think you have to have all the air storage (clippard) tanks before the main regulator or any valves...might want to carefully read the rules before trying it any other way....

Re: 1726 Prototype Testing
 

the pressure sensor that FIRST supplies is not able to give a read-out, you'll need to add some other sort of sensor and add some to display the number on the robot controller side (laptop with some sort of interface will work.)
:yikes: great job

Re: 1726 Prototype Testing
 

You can have the air storage tanks after the main regulator. This may help with the pressure drop and reaction time of the main regulator. There are cheaper pressure transducers but the cheap one are 5-20 ma or raw sensors. For 0-5 volt your going to spend some money.