View Single Post
  #9   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 18-11-2011, 01:16
Ether's Avatar
Ether Ether is offline
systems engineer (retired)
no team
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Rookie Year: 1969
Location: US
Posts: 8,047
Ether has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond repute
Re: pic: Hart District Robotics Swerve Drive Prototype

Quote:
Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi View Post
I've only heard that there is more difficulty in programming a rectangular swerve for reasons unknown to me.

Never dabbled in programming, so I am asking based on what others have told me.

So, is it easier (easier being a relative term) to program a square swerve in terms of controls?
Not really. The inverse kinematics1 are straightforward regardless whether it's square or rectangular.

The challenge with swerve is not the inverse kinematics, but how to control each wheel2.


1The problem of figuring out the theoretically correct speed and steering angle for each of the 4 wheels for any given desired vehicle motion is called inverse kinematics. The derivation of the formulas for this is interesting but not beyond the reach of high school mathematics. The formulas themselves are straightforward.

2If you could make each wheel instantaneously go to its theoretically correct speed and steering angle, swerve would be simpler. But there are dynamics involved. It takes time to steer the wheel and change its speed. During this transition time, the vehicle may do unexpected and/or undesired things. So the real problem in implementing a competent swerve drive is how to control each wheel to obtain predictable operation and acceptable response to driver commands.



Reply With Quote