Quote:
Originally Posted by Gdeaver
With the 2014 perimeter change from a fixed dimension to a perimeter specification a tribot is no long such a disadvantage. So we made a tribot swerve. Last meeting the mechanical students put the robot together and last night the programmers got code on the robot. Its crab only now. Need to work on the chassis rotation part. Here's a video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cs8KWuuUWJY
So what do you think? What are the advantages and disadvantages of tribots? Are we foolish? Anyway I proud of the effort the students put into this. They really worked together well and accomplished this fast. |
In my opinion all teams with a swerve history should be seriously considering this. 16 did it with success for a long time even before the new frame perimeter rules since 2013, and now I feel like there's even less reason to go with 4 wheels. The flexibility in number of wheels and wheel placement inherent to swerve means you're not limited to an approximately rectangular drive base (this can be stretched a la 971). I think one could find a lot of benefits to navigating the field using a frame more closely approximating a circle. Or you can go for a triangle to maximize stability. 3 is also a factor of 6, which happens to be the number of CIMs available for the last two years... (no such luck with 4 drive modules).
I've been entertaining lots of different possibilities for a drive and frame setup like this, considering the possible advantages. 2175 is in no position to go swerve, but different frame perimeter tweaks could still be possible with a WCD.