View Single Post
  #15   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-09-2007, 23:37
Alex.Norton's Avatar
Alex.Norton Alex.Norton is offline
Fidgetting
no team
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Ft. Collins, Colorado
Posts: 190
Alex.Norton has much to be proud ofAlex.Norton has much to be proud ofAlex.Norton has much to be proud ofAlex.Norton has much to be proud ofAlex.Norton has much to be proud ofAlex.Norton has much to be proud ofAlex.Norton has much to be proud ofAlex.Norton has much to be proud of
Send a message via AIM to Alex.Norton Send a message via MSN to Alex.Norton
Re: Gearbox -physics related question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik View Post
As noted, the rotational inertia of most all gearboxes in FIRST are negligible. And if you lightened the gearbox with everything Since the motor is putting out more than zero torque, this isn't going to be the no-load speed.
This all depends on how you define your motor. Technically no motor has a no load speed since the motor has to spin itself which takes some power input. Since the CIM has a resistance and you have to put power in which means that your producing power somehow. I think you could define the whole drive train as a motor, maybe a linear motor, and then say that the top speed of the robot is the free speed.

A lot of solving a problem in physics is just choosing the correct frame of reference and it might be easier to define the drive train as the motor and just measure its speed. I'm not sure what the use of this is but hey...

Alex