View Single Post
  #29   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 27-02-2011, 22:08
PAR_WIG1350's Avatar
PAR_WIG1350 PAR_WIG1350 is offline
Registered User
AKA: Alan Wells
FRC #1350 (Rambots)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 1,190
PAR_WIG1350 has a reputation beyond reputePAR_WIG1350 has a reputation beyond reputePAR_WIG1350 has a reputation beyond reputePAR_WIG1350 has a reputation beyond reputePAR_WIG1350 has a reputation beyond reputePAR_WIG1350 has a reputation beyond reputePAR_WIG1350 has a reputation beyond reputePAR_WIG1350 has a reputation beyond reputePAR_WIG1350 has a reputation beyond reputePAR_WIG1350 has a reputation beyond reputePAR_WIG1350 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Solution: Variable position of cylinder in compliance with <R74>

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roboman01 View Post
You would need two encoders/pots because the load on the arm varies, based on what kind of tube you're picking up, as well as the location of the end effector in relation to the pivot point. Unless you have some method of reliably measuring the load on the cylinder, your method would not be the most precise option.

We also only have one positioning sensor on the main segment of our arm, but we're switching the motor out for a pneumatic cylinder, since the BaneBots gearbox seized up, causing the motor to melt.

I happen to prefer pneumatics over motors, and I've been trying to influence my team in that direction since ever since I joined.
Make no mistake, I love pneumatics and prefer them over motors for some applications. However, for variable positioning applications, I prefer motors.

Also, while it is possible to use only one encoder while using my system, I must admit that it is more prudent to use two. That being said I have already admitted that for this application you solution would be a better fit. However, for applications with a more predictable load, my system becomes more competitive.
__________________