View Single Post
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 04-01-2017, 22:07
Jared Russell's Avatar
Jared Russell Jared Russell is offline
Taking a year (mostly) off
FRC #0254 (The Cheesy Poofs), FRC #0341 (Miss Daisy)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,077
Jared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond repute
Re: WCP Power Take Off

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery View Post
With the vast array and unrestricted quantities of high power motors now available in FRC, I'm struggling to imagine cases where PTOs are still the best option. Back when there were far fewer high powered motors and their quantities were limited, it made sense for your drivetrain CIMs to pull double duty. In 2016, teams had access to up to 6 CIMs and there were no rules restrictions placed on the quantity of 775 Pros or MiniCIMs used, so needing to hunt for that additional mechanism power from your drivetrain seems far less rewarding.
I agree. For 1.6 lbs (plus transmissions and electronics...let's say ~3 lbs total) you can have (2) 775pros generate enough mechanical power to lift a full-weight robot with battery and bumpers vertically at ~3.5 ft/sec (neglecting losses). That's crazy fast, and it gets faster as you add more motors for <1.5 lbs a pop.

You very well may be able to get it lighter/smaller using a PTO, but the coupling between mechanisms means both the drive and the PTO'd mechanism are going have additional design constraints that need to be satisfied (read: less room to adapt if you need to change something down the line).
Reply With Quote