![]() |
Re: Lighter Robots
You can use #25 chains instead of #35 (that you get in the KOP). #25 chains are twice as light, and even though they're weaker, you can still hang 6 robots (~720 lbs) on a single chain without it breaking (it can hold up to 780 lbs). Sometimes you might want to use the regular, #35 chains in arms and the like, because of the stress (just to be on the safe side, there's no reason a #25 chain will break on an arm), but there is no reason not to use them in the drive system, unless you don't have the money to buy them.
|
Re: Lighter Robots
One thing to remember about #25 chain is it must be tensioned properly in order to work well, while #35 chain pretty much keeps working even if it has a little slack in it. So if you use it, make sure you have some plan for keeping it tensioned, either with a mechanical tensioner or by designing exact center-to-center dimensions.
|
Re: Lighter Robots
Quote:
In Toronto one year we weighed in at about 118.5, broke a component or two, fixed them up and strengthened them a bit and... then had to be reweighted for elimination rounds. 120.0 lbs. I'd also suggest building your robot a little under sized in each dimension so that in the event of a major impact causing a slight frame twist (or adding a bolt to make a repair) you don't go from legal to illegal. As a tech inspector I am always pleased when size and weight are mere formalities and not serious obstacles. Jason |
Re: Lighter Robots
I could go on for days, but I'll list the few that bring in the biggest weight savings for the least effort for us.
-thinner materials (both tubing wall thickness and plate in generally). Thinner extrusion tubing is far lighter and far more efficient in terms of strength. -Plastic spacers/standoffs (they're cots from mcmaster in all sorts of sizes from $5-10 for 100 QTY) instead of custom metal. -Smaller Fasteners. We try to only use #10-32 (which is killer strong if you check the math), and have now implemented #4-40's to supplement them in lower load spots. -Focus on Quantity. Look at what parts you robot has a LOT of, take a small bit of weight from them (either in thinner material, pocketing, whatever is is) and it adds up fast. -Plastic fasteners for electronics and low load spots (plastic rivets as well). -Rivets instead of bolts for many items. We tend to add a lot of little gussets, brackets, doo-dads, wire tie downs, etc... If we bolted all these on versus rivets, it'd add up FAST! Most of what I suggested above is pretty much effective use of COTS fasteners, and would maybe cost a team $100-200 per season versus their usual methods, but can easily save 5+ lbs without changing the function, strength, or performance of the robot. Pick up 100 1.5" long 1/4-20's with their associated washers and nuts and you'll see what I mean. |
Re: Lighter Robots
Quote:
|
Re: Lighter Robots
Quote:
Since steel is way denser than aluminum and teams often tend to use much larger bolts that necessary, this is probably the first course of action on Thursday when you try to meet weight. |
Re: Lighter Robots
Quote:
|
Re: Lighter Robots
Quote:
#10 and #4 will do 90% of what you need. |
Re: Lighter Robots
Quote:
|
Re: Lighter Robots
In DC, we were 0.1 over the weight limit, so we let the air out of the tanks for the pneumatics and ended up at 119.9
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:48. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi