Quote:
Originally Posted by thefro526
The information in my post was intended to be used as a guide, rather than a matter of fact. When all things are considered (specifically wheel type, robot weight, rotating mass weight, strategic intent) a drivetrains specifics should naturally fall into place.
That being said, history (2013 newton) tells me that 68 is no stranger to getting across the field quickly, so if the application is similar, there's no doubt in my mind that your data is spot on.
Going back to my original post, much of drive design beyond the basic 90-95% or so (essentially optimization of the system) is very application specific, and is best catered towards a robot and it's driver. So no matter what, much of this data should be taken as a starting point, and adjusted from there. Enough adjustment, and you might just attain perfection... If you've got the time.
|
Very fair. It's probably a good rule of thumb so you can push the envelope without getting burned.
That robot was really good at a couple things, one of them being getting across the field (the other was standing back up after we tipped it over
), and it was a lot of fun to drive.
That also is some very good advice. The best I can give is this: One speed or two speed, if you've found a drive system that will work for you and meet your objectives on the field, that's usually pretty independent of game specifics. Stick to that system and get your last 5-10% out of it. That will serve you far more than starting over the next season with a "better" system. Once you've nailed that one down or decide it's not going to meet your goals any longer, look at something else (hopefully in the offseason) and consider it.