View Single Post
  #10   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 18-03-2007, 15:13
AdamHeard's Avatar
AdamHeard AdamHeard is offline
Lead Mentor
FRC #0973 (Greybots)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Atascadero
Posts: 5,503
AdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to AdamHeard
Re: Drive Train & Control Types '07

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joel J. View Post
I don't think they are using bumpers, and I think they are in the 110 lb weight class. So, they are at about 124lbs, with battery (maximum). I also read something about them weighing about 85lbs, because they were planning on adding ramps. If they didn't add weight to get to 110lbs, then they are really scrawny at 100lbs, with battery. That hurts their pushing power. 100*1.3 is equivalent to 150*.867, about the amount of traction advantage a full-weighted 4ft class robot would have with something even less grippy than the old wheelchair wheels that were in the kit. They have the torque, and they have the treads, but they are lacking the weight.
Do the old wheelchair wheels realyl have that much traction? The new AM wheels are 1.0-1.1 and they seem to have a lot more traction than the skyways...

And to contribute to the post; At LA we ran two small CIMs on each side to 1.2 cof wheels in a 6 wheel drive. We weren't traction limited and had a 9-10 fps top speed. For San Diego, we are probably switching to a small CIM, a large and a FP (modularity and CNCs = awesome) which will give us the same speed, but we will be traction limited so we we'll be able to push a lot better.