View Single Post
  #8   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 27-10-2014, 23:04
Dunngeon Dunngeon is offline
Pumped
AKA: Ryan
FRC #0973 (Greybots)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: Cal Poly San Luis Obispo
Posts: 299
Dunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond repute
Re: pic: CV Robotics WCD 6wd Drivebase Prototype

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrian Clark View Post
-snip-

-Adrian
I hadn't considered that it would warp, thanks for pointing that out! I'll look into it. Our sponsor wasn't sure, they are primarily a steel outfit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethroes View Post
Looks nice guys. Will you have a prototype on your Bunnybot robot or will you be using another drive train? -snip-
I neglected to mention that we are building this drive right now, the 2x1 entered machining yesterday. Unfortunately for swerve drives, we subscribe to the "swerve is never necessary" ethos. Even though I think your drives are pretty brilliant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Lawrence View Post
I noticed the strand thickness on your bellypan is much thicker than the thickness we usually design for, so you could probably go a lot thinner than you currently do.

I'm assuming you are choosing to use a custom transmission because it fits your resources better than a COTS one, though if it doesn't I could always lead you to some sources about why COTS transmissions are a great solution.

All that aside it looks like a very promising design that will serve you well should you choose to use it for the 2015 season.
The strand thickness was fairly arbitrary, we weren't sure how thin we could go and still have torsional strength, looks like we can scale it down a fair bit (though not to your level....yet)


I'd prefer a COTS gearbox over this one, but we use the gearboxes to teach advanced CNC code to students. All of the CNC code used to mill these gearboxes is handwritten. The only other advantage to this gearbox for us is it sits much lower than a WCP or Vex gearbox in the frame. Personally, I'd like a 2-stage gearbox (16.8 FPS is high) w/ shifters, but team history precludes that effort for the time being.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dragon_pilot View Post
Why did you guys decide on using chain instead of belts?
It simplifies our drivebase, with belts we would need tensioning blocks and would also run the small risk of snapping a belt. We ran our drivebase without chain tensioners last year, and that's carrying over because it worked so well (71 matches, still within tolerance).
__________________
(2015-?): 973
(2012-2015): 955
Reply With Quote