Quote:
Originally Posted by jspatz1
First of all, as far as I am aware there are no restrictions on using flow controls and metering valves. You can use as many COTS commercial flow controls you want as long as they are unaltered and meet the pressure requirement.
|
That is good to know, and seems to be the consensus on this thread. It certainly makes logical sense that flow controls should be allowed. I kind of wish I could point to a rule in the Pneumatics part of the Robot section of the 2011 rules that shows that flow controls are allowed. But there seems to be enough consensus on this point, and enough teams that have passed inspection with flow controls, that we shouldn't be concerned about it, especially at an off-season event.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jspatz1
My philosophy on pneumatic actions such as this is that pneumatic acuatation is only what it is, a somewhat spongy push or pull with no live speed or force control. If it does not give you the behavior you want, you need to change what is being actuated so that it does....I am refering to using counterweight, springs, friction, weight distribution, and shock absorbers to even your load through its travel, so your actuator yields a uniform result. It is better to design your mechanism so that it utilizes the uniform speed/force that pneumatics inherently provide, than to use complex flow control methods to try to make the pneumatics into something they are not.
|
This also makes a lot of sense. I will discuss this design concept with our mechanical team. We already use springs in our elevator, to assist the electric motor, and there's no reason we can't use similar design ideas with the pneumatics that raise and lower our arm. Excellent point, thank you!