View Single Post
  #15   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 19-02-2016, 00:33
jkelleyrtp's Avatar
jkelleyrtp jkelleyrtp is offline
Let's just build a robot
AKA: Jon Kelley
FRC #5511 (Cortechs Robotics)
Team Role: Mechanical
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: Apex, NC
Posts: 121
jkelleyrtp is a glorious beacon of lightjkelleyrtp is a glorious beacon of lightjkelleyrtp is a glorious beacon of lightjkelleyrtp is a glorious beacon of lightjkelleyrtp is a glorious beacon of lightjkelleyrtp is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Team 3495 Drivetrain teaser

Quote:
Originally Posted by Valkonn View Post
Not to stoke the fire or anything, but JPBlacksmiths' prediction was correct. We encountered a lot of slipping when trying to go over the obstacles. We just weren't getting enough contact from the belt to the sprocket, only about a fifth of the sprocket was being used.

We have since switched to using chain (for the first time ever) for our four modules. We still have belts going from the gearbox to the modules, as it has much better contact and does not slip whatsoever.

Thanks for everyones opinion on the matter, they were taken into consideration and our robot is much more effective because of it.
The general rule of thumb is 120 deg engagement for belts/pulleys and sprocket/chain. This can be mitigated through the use of static rollers or properly designing the system to accommodate belt lengths. ALWAYS use a belt length tool like WCP to determine lengths. Never design your modules and then try to fit a belt on.

IMO belts run smoother, weigh less, and require less maintenance than chain. Properly tensioned belts will give you less headache than chain that is "cut to fit" because you are slave to the number of links in the chain. Also, behavior of #25 chain is different than #35 and might introduce slip into the system.
__________________
Cortechs Robotics 2014-Present
Mechanical, CAD