![]() |
sneak peak
super rough draft
looky looky ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Re: sneak peak
Very nice! Don't forget to add some cross bracing to the vertical members. And always remember that rubber tread moving next to the motor will induce some static electricity.
|
Re: sneak peak
How thick are those sideplates? I am almost they are currently not thick enough to be strong enough
|
Re: sneak peak
Ditto. They look 1/32 to 1/16ish. Make em thicker. I'm not sure how thick but 1/4" is probably a safe bet.
-Vivek |
Re: sneak peak
Quote:
btw this is for our crab drivetrain. ![]() ![]() |
Re: sneak peak
Is this what they call a swerve drive????:confused: But hten what's a crab drive???
I'm a little confused as to the difference |
Re: sneak peak
your not already planning on using a crab drive for the 09 year, are you?
|
Re: sneak peak
Quote:
It's the way it's set up. Correct me if I'm wrong, but a swerve drive has two or more sets of modules and a crab drive only has one. (Or it's the other way around.) I'm going to say that 1/10 is too thin for stress points. What a lot of teams do is take 1/4 and put the holes in, then mill the rest of the plate out, leaving a border and a small area around each hole at original thickness to add strength. You really don't want to make a mistake and go too thin; having the thin stuff fail mid-match will take your robot out of the match. No spare means you may be out of the competition. If nothing else, do the stress analysis and post it so that we know that you know what you are doing. If that analysis (which should probably take into account getting hit by 3 robots simultaneously from the same side) shows that it won't break, even under running conditions, then I'll retract my statement that 1/10 is too thin. If it doesn't, then we'll help you redesign so that it won't fail. |
Re: sneak peak
I'm not as concerned about the thin-ness as I am about the lack of connections between the two sides. You really ought to add some standoffs down near the wheel, or better yet, machine the whole module out of .125" thick boxed aluminum.
You could always use steel. That would certainly strengthen the connection points. |
Re: sneak peak
Quote:
|
Re: sneak peak
Quote:
-Vivek |
Re: sneak peak
Quote:
Imagine the stresses the module can take when it rapidly changes directions while the robot is moving full speed (and even worse takes a hit from another robot at the same time). |
Re: sneak peak
Quote:
|
Re: sneak peak
Quote:
|
Re: sneak peak
Quote:
Don't forget that a 140lb robot running at 12 ft./sec imparts a pretty big side load to your module and all the force will be transmitted to the frame through the ring and a small amount to the top bearing. You can't keep your friction numbers unless all the tread is on the floor. |
Re: sneak peak
Quote:
As you said earlier you used 1/10, was it for this type of swerve/crab setup or for a 6-wheel? As a mechanical engineer I would take the advice of fellow mech-heads and increase the width of your side plates, 1/8th is the smallest I would go with major cross bracing. Looking at your setup your main drive shaft is about 6" away from your main mounting point for those side plates, and that type of torque on 1/10" sheet won't last long. Take a look at some of the more successful crab drives of the last couple years (i.e. 71, 111, 1625), and make your modules beffey to start and slowly cut away the fat as you improve the design. |
Re: sneak peak
Quote:
|
Re: sneak peak
progress
![]() |
Re: sneak peak
Lol crab drive is really awe some
|
Re: sneak peak
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 16:45. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi