View Single Post
  #10   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-04-2014, 17:07
Chris is me's Avatar
Chris is me Chris is me is offline
no bag, vex only, final destination
AKA: Pinecone
FRC #0228 (GUS Robotics); FRC #2170 (Titanium Tomahawks)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Glastonbury, CT
Posts: 7,669
Chris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Chris is me
Re: Swerve: Belts or Chain?

Quote:
Originally Posted by aldaeron View Post
Why do teams use 4 total gear reductions instead of one central gearbox and a chain to transmit power to all 4 wheels? With a 72T or 80T 20 DP gear attaching to 4 CIMs you could make one big gearbox in the center, perhaps even add shifting for a second overall gear ratio.
4 gearboxes allows for independent control of each wheel.

Quote:
Why do teams use 4 steering motors? This would seems to make it hard to steer straight forward (as mentioned in one paper previously linked). With 1 or 2 motors for steering and a worm gear based gearbox and a chain the wheels would be mechanically synced (minus any stretching of the chain). I realize that you would need two steering chains (i.e. 2 sets of 2 wheels chained together) to be able to rotate the bot around its center. By using less motors and therefore less controllers this would seems to save weight
To put it bluntly, if your team can't handle putting 4 independent modules in the same direction, your team definitely can't handle the software complexity of a well tuned swerve drive.

Without being able to independently power wheels or turn modules independent of one another, a swerve base has no ability to rotate, only translate.

Assuming a four wheel swerve:
All wheels linked, all steering linked - robot can translate in any direction only, but no rotation.

Pairs of wheels linked, all steering linked - robot can translate in any direction. Robot may be able to rotate the same way a skid steer robot does, depending on which wheels are linked and if turning scrub can be overcome.

Pairs of wheels linked, opposite corner steering linked - This allows for translation in any direction, and rotation without translation, but not rotation with translation.

All wheels independent, all corners steered independent - This configuration allows for any combination of rotation and translation at the same time.

With the wide open motor rules, etc. the 4 wheel independent swerve design has gained a lot of popularity among those whom have mastered the swerve drive. I would not go to a lesser option for the sole reason that you don't think your team can handle independent swerve - if your team can't handle independent swerve, it likely can't handle ANY swerve. Not saying there aren't good reasons to make other choices, though.k
__________________
Mentor / Drive Coach: 228 (2016-?)
...2016 Waterbury SFs (with 3314, 3719), RIDE #2 Seed / Winners (with 1058, 6153), Carver QFs (with 503, 359, 4607)
Mentor / Consultant Person: 2170 (2017-?)
---
College Mentor: 2791 (2010-2015)
...2015 TVR Motorola Quality, FLR GM Industrial Design
...2014 FLR Motorola Quality / SFs (with 341, 4930)
...2013 BAE Motorola Quality, WPI Regional #1 Seed / Delphi Excellence in Engineering / Finalists (with 20, 3182)
...2012 BAE Imagery / Finalists (with 1519, 885), CT Xerox Creativity / SFs (with 2168, 118)
Student: 1714 (2009) - 2009 Minnesota 10,000 Lakes Regional Winners (with 2826, 2470)
2791 Build Season Photo Gallery - Look here for mechanism photos My Robotics Blog (Updated April 11 2014)