Quote:
Originally Posted by Ether
Here's a link to a PDF giving the equations for inverse kinematics for an N-wheel swerve, where N>2.
|
Thanks, this is really useful!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nate Laverdure
The keyway in the CIM output shaft does not go all the way to the end (pdf link). You could mill flat spots in the shaft to provide landing areas for the set screws on your shaft coupling, but I'd expect this to be a point of failure. |
I agree, this is the weakest part of the design. In the original 1 CIM version, the CIM was mounted on the upper plate and there was a hole cut out the bottom part, so no shaft coupling was needed.
A better solution might be to take a large diameter aluminum shaft about 3 inches long, put an 8mm hole in the bottom for the CIM, use a CNC mill to make the pulley part on the bottom, then turn down the rest to a 3/8" diameter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalTran
Why might going 13fps be advantageous over 7fps? Have you found it advantageous, excluding 2008, to have a high top speed?
|
Yes, we've found that having a really high top speed can make a really good robot if you have a lot of driver practice.
In 2013, if we were blocked from leaving the feeder station and returning to our pyramid, we could really quickly go around/under the pyramid faster than we could shift to our pushing gear and push a defender out of the way.
In 2011, being able to quickly grab a tube and quickly return was extremely important.
In 2003, the ability to go fast/have control of the robot was the whole game. That's why teams like 111 who had really good control of their robot could win so easily.