View Single Post
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-12-2016, 16:57
cbale2000's Avatar
cbale2000 cbale2000 is offline
Registered User
AKA: Chris Bale
FRC #0703 (Phoenix)
Team Role: Leadership
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Saginaw, MI
Posts: 928
cbale2000 has a reputation beyond reputecbale2000 has a reputation beyond reputecbale2000 has a reputation beyond reputecbale2000 has a reputation beyond reputecbale2000 has a reputation beyond reputecbale2000 has a reputation beyond reputecbale2000 has a reputation beyond reputecbale2000 has a reputation beyond reputecbale2000 has a reputation beyond reputecbale2000 has a reputation beyond reputecbale2000 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: paper: 4 CIM versus 6 CIM theoretical calculations

Quote:
Originally Posted by GeeTwo View Post
While 1C+2m would certainly have better performance than a 2 CIM drive train, that performance gain is offset by a greater weight and volume, both of motors and of the gearbox - 3 motor gearboxes usually have a higher center of gravity or more gears than a 2 motor gearbox (or both). There's also the matter of another motor controller. There are certainly cases where this would be better, but I expect they're less common than the configurations already discussed.
I'll second this, it certainly wouldn't be the first choice for motor configurations IMO. In general there's rarely a need to use more than 2 CIMs outside of the drive system anyways, so the number of instances you would actually need to swap out to a 1CIM+2MiniCIM should be minimal (short of maybe saving a little weight if you already have a 2CIM+1MiniCIM drive and desperately needed to loose around 1lb)
Reply With Quote