Thread: CVT, which teams are planning on using them for next year?
View Single Post
  #9   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 31-07-2005, 23:56
NoodleKnight's Avatar
NoodleKnight NoodleKnight is offline
24 Hours of LeMons?
FRC #0100 (WHS&CHS Robotics)
Team Role: Alumni
  
Join Date: Aug 2004
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Davis, CA
Posts: 320
NoodleKnight has much to be proud ofNoodleKnight has much to be proud ofNoodleKnight has much to be proud ofNoodleKnight has much to be proud ofNoodleKnight has much to be proud ofNoodleKnight has much to be proud ofNoodleKnight has much to be proud ofNoodleKnight has much to be proud ofNoodleKnight has much to be proud of
Send a message via AIM to NoodleKnight
Re: CVT, which teams are planning on using them for next year?
lead screw and potentiometer, or a bunch of limit switches!

I have to agree with sanddrag, the CVT should be controlled via computer based system -- the driver won't easily be able to smoothly control the CVT's "shifting" as a computer-based system would, and by setting designated shift points for the driver to select, then you might as well have been better off building a shifting-gearbox with n-number of shiftpoints.
Manual override is always nice, yes, but only if the program dies or if the driver really needs to shift fast.
The CVT's shifting program should vary the transmissions reduction ratios on current draw (like sanddrag said) versus wheel speed. If the current draw is high and the wheels speed is low, the transmission should increase the reduction for more torque, etc...
And I don't really think that slipping in a CVT is a big problem, just build it around a high RPM/low torque area -- shouldn't having high RPM's help shifting anyways?
__________________
WHS/CHS Robotics - Team 100 (2003-2006):
2006- Delphi's Driving Tommorow's Technology @ Davis | Imagery Award @ SVR | 2004- SVR Finalists (w/ 691 and 1280)| 2003- Delphi's Driving Tommorow's Technology @ Sac