View Single Post
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-12-2012, 00:36
Jon Stratis's Avatar
Jon Stratis Jon Stratis is offline
Electrical/Programming Mentor
FRC #2177 (The Robettes)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,747
Jon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Elevators: Cascaded vs Continuous

We've done both.

The first was continuous. Routing the wires was our biggest issue, finally solved through using energy chain to help guide them along the correct path. We didn't have any real mechanical issues, once we got it figured out.

The second was cascade. This made wire routing extremely easy, and we never had any issues with that. However, this elevator had a lot more mechanical issues, partly around binding and partly due to a design that forced us to stall the FP motor in both the up and down positions. I think we just had a slightly worse design for this particular one, and for some reason had a harder time keeping everything square.

The biggest issue is ensuring there isn't binding. We had an extremely overbuilt design the first time, so everything stayed square and didn't bind. While we used a similar design for the moving parts, things didn't hold as square and there was a lot of binding the second time. To alleviate this issue, I really loved what Team Titanium did with their elevator in 2011. Basically, you can look at the outer stage as two pieces of angle iron, and the inner stage interfaced with that using roller blade wheels. A top down view would look something like this:
<- ->
The fixed angle iron is <>, the roller blade wheels that roll up and down it are - -.

I think the decision on which to use really comes down to motor power and weight. Cascade typically requires more power, as each segment essentially doubles the force needed to lift your weight. Continuous doesn't have this problem, and the force required is directly related to the weight of the elevator + game piece. If you have motor power to spare, I would go with Cascade to make wire routing easier.

Also, take note of how long the wires are if you have motors on the end of the elevator! Those long wires can significantly drop the voltage the motors see. You can compensate for this in two ways: First, use larger wire. This can be tricky, as larger wire tends to be less flexible. Second, use multiple wires for each motor. Run two wires from each motor lead through the robot and to the same connector on the speed controller (this way you are still only powering it through 1 speed controller!). This will cut the voltage drop in half, and deliver more power to your motor! Expect to be questioned on this by your inspector, as inspectors aren't used to seeing multiple wires run out of each connector on the speed controller or the motor, but you should be able to prove (with a multimeter) to his/her satisfaction that it is actually legal!
__________________
2007 - Present: Mentor, 2177 The Robettes
LRI: North Star 2012-2016; Lake Superior 2013-2014; MN State Tournament 2013-2014, 2016; Galileo 2016; Iowa 2017
2015: North Star Regional Volunteer of the Year
2016: Lake Superior WFFA