A quick note: you probably should have used the search function, it seems like this debate comes up every other week. At any rate...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botwoon
I've used neither, but I can draw on enough of my experience to tell you that Mek drivetrains don't hold a candle to swerve in terms of speed, traction, efficiency, agility, etc.
|
I have seen mecanum drives that, at the very least, don't get pushed around. They won't really push much, but they can certainly hold their ground. Mecanum can be about equal in terms of agility, although you're right in that you can always build a swerve drive that's faster and more efficient. I can't comment much on the traction.
That said, as I noted above, this debate happens all the time and it basically boils down to this:
Both mecanum and swerve:
-aren't worth the effort most of the time, especially since most teams can't even build a decent tank drive
-heavy!
-complicated
-difficult and time consuming to implement
-have numerous points of failure due to the extra complexity, although it can be true that their failures are less severe/impactful than a tank drive failing depending on the implementation
Mecanum:
-easier to program (pretty sure they have this in the library nowadays)
-easier to design (pretty standard)
-as noted above, generally inferior in every way to swerve, although I have seen some implementations that are just "sometimes inferior, sometimes on-par" as opposed to "always inferior"
Swerve:
-very difficult to program for full control if you're going with independent modules, although getting a basic crab drive up and running is simple
-harder to design, lots of different implementations and things to worry about
-Theoretically as fast and powerful as a tank drive but with far superior maneuverability
I've personally programmed and driven a swerve drive with four independent swerve modules, though I've only driven
against mecanum robots.