Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeland1126
Apologies, I'm being quite unclear about these things right now.
By "Standard swerve", I'm not referring to anything particular about the Swerve itself. I'm referring more to a Swerve from a team who hasn't really mastered the Swerve yet (i.e. 16, 111, 118, etc.). Those teams have worked up good implementations to Swerve, and have made steps in overcoming the common short comings that go with it.
Again, I apologies. I'm being very unclear.
|
Not a problem, your unclear term usage inspired quite a bit of good discussion.
Also, it's worth mentioning that a team could build a 'fast' (Relative term), 'powerful' (Relative term), swerve using proven COTS components from AM and Team221 LLC - they've done the hard mechanical work for a team looking for swerve performance without swerve machining resources.
Doesn't address the software though...