Quote:
Originally Posted by Ty Tremblay
To put it simply, what advantage would low-gear omni mode give you? What advantage would high-gear 4-wheel traction give you?
From my experience, a major goal when developing a drivetrain should be to reduce the mental load on the driver. Having 4 possible drivetrain states for the driver to keep track of sounds like too much.
|
Low-gear omni provides safe-zone agility while lining up on a precision game piece or goal, like 2011, 2012 or 2013 (2012 in particular).
High-gear traction provides faster straight-line movement since the 4 traction wheels on the corners make it harder for the robot to turn itself. This is tremendously useful in autonomous 'drive straight' routines like 2011.
Changing to high-gear traction at speed can prevent a robot from being knocked off course while still beating a defender to a point straight ahead.
On the surface I agree with your last point, that 4 modes is a bit much. Yet for the team to be successful with any "butterfly" drive, they will need practice. The modes I've described are fairly intuitive, so it wouldn't be an issue for a team with a nominal amount of practice. I've driver coached lots of students over the years only a few of them would not have been able to handle a more intuitive setup of the modes.
From a mechanical maintenance perspective, 4 modes can be a nightmare given that there are 6 subsystems* with 6 actuation points in the current CAD above and 4 subsystems with 4 actuation points in the 624 design. I like that your design has only 4 subsystems with 4 actuation points and is effective yet simple, but I also know how my team does autonomous and driver training, so it wouldn't be right for us. That's a tradeoff the OP has to decide on as well.
*subsystem here is a contained system which is actuated (i.e. not the drive train frame or wheels which are not actuated). Each shifting gearbox is 1 subsystem, but a non-shifting gearbox is not.