Thread: Wheelbases
View Single Post
  #14   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 19-03-2012, 07:54
Aur0r4's Avatar
Aur0r4 Aur0r4 is offline
Engineering Mentor
AKA: Jim Browne
None #1058 (PVC Pirates)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Londonderry, NH
Posts: 65
Aur0r4 has a brilliant futureAur0r4 has a brilliant futureAur0r4 has a brilliant futureAur0r4 has a brilliant futureAur0r4 has a brilliant futureAur0r4 has a brilliant futureAur0r4 has a brilliant futureAur0r4 has a brilliant futureAur0r4 has a brilliant futureAur0r4 has a brilliant futureAur0r4 has a brilliant future
Send a message via AIM to Aur0r4
Re: Wheelbases

This was our first year with a wide 4-wheel robot and we had issues with motor load during turning (2 super shifters driving four kit wheels). We had to switch to omni wheels in the front to make turning easier. We have also had stability issues on the bridge and during very fast direction changes.

To be honest, one of the best tank wheelbases we've had was a long 2-wheel drive with ball casters in the front. Obviously, this is not good for climbing obstacles, but it allows high friction wheels to be used with no scrubbing during turning and gives great maneuverability when the driver gets used to the turning point. Our 2003 robot climbed the mesh ramp and pushed robots off the top with standard casters and big, soft rubber wheels in the back.

I wouldn't really advocate our current design in the future. There's better climbing setups, and its only a mediocre floor-only design. The issue with compromise is that can often produce results with no advantage either way.
__________________
Jim Browne, EIT
Team 1058 - PVC Pirates
Reply With Quote