View Single Post
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 15-09-2011, 01:14
s_forbes's Avatar
s_forbes s_forbes is offline
anonymous internet person
FRC #0842 (Falcon Robotics)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,137
s_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond reputes_forbes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Articulating tubes on roller claws

Quote:
Originally Posted by PAR_WIG1350 View Post
...By locking the differential case in place, the rollers spin in opposite directions rotating the tube within the claw, by locking the two outputs together, the rollers spin in the same direction to intake or release the tube...
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH View Post
Now, if you want to count any servos used as motors, then yeah, that is 2 motors.
It sounds like a much more fun challenge if you limit the mechanism to using only one degree of actuation! I can think of a few approaches, but they all inevitably end up using more hardware than simply hooking up two motors to drive the rollers.

This was a good lesson we took from last year; if you minimize the degrees of freedom of a manipulator you can make a system that is in theory simpler than one that uses more actuators, but the final result typically ends up being more complicated than simply using multiple motors. Still, that won't stop us from trying... manipulators that utilize minimal actuators have a nice appeal.
Reply With Quote