![]() |
most "epic" motor ever
having seen motors from years past, i have seen some beastly ones. like the van door and the minibike cim.
so, What in your is the most epic motor ever included in the KOP? |
Re: most "epic" motor ever
I'd have to say that the Globe motor was the most versatile motor we used to get, the Cim is by far the best we get now.
|
Re: most "epic" motor ever
CIM 'nuff said
|
Re: most "epic" motor ever
The new FP and the RS-755-18 are, currently, the most powerful "smaller than a 2.5" cim" class motors.
if we expand it beyond the KOP and FIRST, this gets my vote.:D :cool: :eek: :ahh: :p |
Re: most "epic" motor ever
I want a kit that lets you use as many CIMs and Globes as you want, and no other motors. Wouldn't that be nice?
|
Re: most "epic" motor ever
The 2011 Fisher Price Motor. With enough speed to get air over the armature it is a beast.
|
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Quote:
|
Re: most "epic" motor ever
i think in an ideal world we would have 4 cims, 4 FP, 4 window motors.
|
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Quote:
CIMs & Globes have been bulletproof. So far the 775s are holding up, we got lucky with 4 good ones out of 6. |
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Quote:
The van door motors were good in that they were the largest worm geared motors available, but they were only around 70 W output. And when it came down to using the worm gear for holding something in place, you quickly discovered that they could be backdriven one of two ways: either because the plastic worm gear's efficiency was too high, or because you'd stripped the teeth off of that aforementioned plastic gear. Similarly, the minibike motors (CIM FP801-005/Fisher-Price) were only about 270 W. Regular (smaller) CIMs are more powerful. My vote is for the Bosch drill motors in the kits in 2003 and 2004 (Bosch 2 607 022 078/Scintilla). Their output was 448 W, with a free speed of 19 760 rev/min. If it weren't for the tricky mounting points, the 0.7 module gear and the fragile and exposed electrical connections, they'd be perfect.... In fact, the only other motors to approach that kind of performance were the incredible self-destructing Fisher-Prices from 2005 (the Mabuchi 74550-0642, which was designed for 6 V, but given to us to run at 12 V with 407 W output power). |
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Well, if you were looking for beastly, it looks like that was answered above.
However, I really miss the keyag motors. I don't know much about their power outuput, but it was definitely more than the densos we have now. Also, globes were great! You could use them for just about any sort of manipulator. |
Re: most "epic" motor ever
I know everyone hates them but I really like denso window motors when used correctly. Non-backdriving and low rpm thanks to the integrated worm gear drive.
Everything else, FP and CIM. |
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Never had an issue with a CIM or globe. Stripped, deformed, burned out, thermal tripped, or broke the leads on nearly everything else.:rolleyes:
|
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Quote:
|
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Quote:
It's a miracle we didn't kill them, or the transmission. |
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Quote:
My team has a bit of Tim Taylor in them so "just put a CIM on it" can be heard just about every day. ~DK |
Re: most "epic" motor ever
My favorite motor was the fifth CIM we got in 2010. It added a really cool twist to the game.
|
Re: most "epic" motor ever
I'm really liking the RS775-18 thus far. Seems plenty powerful, takes to stalling pretty well (better than an FP) and if it weren't for the transmissions being nearly impossible to get, I'd say they are the best motor in the KOP this year.
One year it'd be nice if FIRST gave us a list of Motors we could use with the only restriction on quantity being a total maximum power output. (Sum of all motor power can't exceed 2000W or something.) That'd be interesting. |
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Quote:
*You can't have gigantic motors because the max. current per motor is limited by the 40a breakers *You can't have too many large motors because you only have 8 40a breakers *You can't have a ridiculous number of motors with 30a or 20a breakers, because you only have so many 30a slots as well, and a few things also use those breakers (like the cRio modules). Favorite motors: CIM motors are awesome for high-power things like drivetrains. FP or 550 motors are awesome for high power but more predictably-loaded things (such as arms) or high power, light weight things (like roller claws or other high-up mechanisms) An AMP or CIM-U-LATOR makes the FP or 550 think it's a CIM. I would be very happy to just have those two motors. Most things would use a CIM interface, and the limited number of CIMs could be distributed, and the rest could get FP or 550's through CIM-U-LATORs. Anything without a CIM interface would accept a FP or 550 directly. |
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Quote:
|
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Quote:
|
Re: most "epic" motor ever
I liked that gearbox with 6 motors on it that I saw from an '07 game, I think it was called the V6, 4 CIMs, 2 smaller ones. Anyone remember this?
|
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Quote:
|
Re: most "epic" motor ever
CIMs are the best permanent magnet DC motors I have ever used - in FIRST, at work, in school, etc. We had been unable to destroy one in 12 years (until this year thanks to an overzealous rookie and some incorrectly sized mounting hardware)!
I like the suggestion for unlimited CIMs and Globes (or a suitably robust similar "small" motor - the RS550s might be up to it). |
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Eh, I'd like some sort of constraint on CIMs, just so we don't have 8-motor drive trains that ram into everything in sight or are nearly impossible to get out of the way of. The CIM takes the cake for 'epic' for their robustness.
I like the motors that spin slowly enough out of the box that I don't NEED to gear it down 1000:1 using a $200+ COTS gearbox or multiple sprocket reductions -- the denso's and the globes were PERFECT for that. Need a wrist joint? Just add 1 sprocket reduction after the motor output. To me, it's more of a challenge to figure out how to do things with less available power than it is to use less power via software. |
Re: most "epic" motor ever
[quote=JesseK;1033040]Eh, I'd like some sort of constraint on CIMs.../QUOTE]
How about weight? Each 2.5" CIM weighs aout 2.5 lbs IIRC. 4 = 10lbs, 8 = 20 lbs. Unless someone knows some magic I don't there really isn't any way to lighten them. At some point most teams are going to have to use lighter motors so as not to eat up so much of their 120 lb weight budget. I think allowing 6 CIMs at most would be a reasonable thing to do unless they up the 120 lb weight limit, increase the number of 40A slots on the PD board, and up the 120A main breaker - none of which I see happening anytime soon. There are plenty of contraints already limiting the "unlimited use of CIMS". |
Re: most "epic" motor ever
[quote=DeepWater;1033098]
Quote:
|
Re: most "epic" motor ever
[quote=DeepWater;1033098]
Quote:
It's like the whole debate upon regulations of car safety. More powerful engines and higher speeds equate to more structural strength necessary to prevent deaths on the highways. This means more weight added to cars as well. Rather than limiting power output, the typical regulations are on structure integrity during a crash. If the industry would tone down the power a bit, we wouldn't quite need all of that regulation. Conversely, since FRC has a pesky weight limit, we do not necessarily have the spare weight for adding more structural integrity to EVERYTHING we design. So I'd much rather the GDC limit the power capabilities to the drive train as a slight preventative measure to prevent 'overkill' scenarios. As it stands right now, teams who want a 6-motor drive train have to do more engineering than just purchasing COTS gearboxes and slapping them on the KOP drive train. That in and of itself is limiting enough for quantity seen on the field, I think. |
Re: most "epic" motor ever
2.5" CIM motors, followed closely by the Banebot RS775-18. While much praise has already been espoused about the versatility and durability of the CIM motors, we've found that the Banebot RS775-18 motors are close runners up. Unlike the other BB motors, the RS775's are champs and won't give up the ghost just because you told them to run at stall for a few seconds. During testing, we learned they'll trip out the Jaguars or circuit breakers long before they'll suffer any harm.
Quote:
On the other hand, adding more power to an FRC drivetrain may actually lower a team's effective pushing power, as dynamic friction is almost always lower than static friction. (Think back to Lunacy). Thus, by having more motors in a drivetrain, they will increase the odds that the motors will be able to overcome the maximum static friction with the ground and start spinning their wheels, thus lowering their ability to push other robots. Now even if they can overcome the traction limitations, they still have to deal with the relatively small field size. How likely is it that robots will have the room to accelerate to speeds beyond the top speeds of 15-16 ft/sec already seen on many FRC robots? Why do you think teams don't currently use three or four speed gearboxes that can theoretically take their robot to 20, 25, or 30 ft/sec? It's because the field is small enough such that gearing for that speed would never be useful. |
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Quote:
|
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Quote:
|
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Quote:
|
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Quote:
So there's a trade: is the added complexity, weight and opportunity cost (in terms of not having those motors on another mechanism) worth it? In drivetrain-heavy games where robots are operating at high power most of the time, my sense is that this is often a good decision. Quote:
For example, a servo-shifted Super Shifter with default configuration, mounted in place of the Toughboxes on a 2010 kitbot probably should just stay in high gear most of the time: there's no point waiting a half-second for the shift to happen. So, returning to the constraint of limited field size, and recalling the previous discussion about motors, I'd say the most practical way to achieve really high speed (in the current FRC game) is lots of motors and a high gear ratio. |
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Arthur, I agree with you about traction limiting to a point. Pushing wasn't the concern -- high speed ramming is (hence, the highway safety analogy). More motors nets more acceleration in shorter distances, meaning the occurances of high speed ramming would go up. Could we adapt? Sure. Yet why should we have to adapt to that when the overall build season / competition experience in its current form is already stressful enough?
|
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Add a poll to this. Then you will see the results teams think.
|
Re: most "epic" motor ever
Vandoor Motor, hands down.
Yes, it's old. Last included in 08 kit. But by god, there's a reason that we joke that is has more torque than a toyota camery in the camery's highest gear. |
Re: most "epic" motor ever
I'm going to have to say that size to punch, I am REALLY REALLY liking the BaneBots rs775-18 motors. They're just darn cool motors, and they're a lot more versatile than people think. Just make sure your power leads aren't grounded to the case.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 18:31. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi