View Single Post
  #11   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-04-2008, 14:58
Jimmy Cao Jimmy Cao is offline
Registered User
AKA: Jimmy Cao
no team
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 295
Jimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant futureJimmy Cao has a brilliant future
Re: Swerve drive 4, 2+2?

With a 4WD independent swerve, the software is A LOT harder. Even with a well tuned PID, and good control logic, the robot will still tend to drift, but it is mroe maneuverable than any form of crab (with the exception of 111's implementation).

The theory behind 4WD independent swerve is usually rotation. The robot always rotates about a point somewhere in space. If the point is "infinitely" far away, the robot goes straight.

When you use all 4 wheels linked, you can translate around the field just fine (118 style) but you cannot turn with ease.

I don't know if it's better to link left/right or front/back, but I know 111 links diagonals. By using drop-down casters in front, they can have the ability to have the maneuverability of a full-swerve system.

We use a 4 wheel independently steered system. It takes a lot of work to do, but it's very fun and maneuverable. Unfortunately, these systems are rather heavy and motor-greedy. We use our 6 most powerful motors (4x CIM, 2x FP) and the two globes on the drive. It's a lot of powerful motors to lose, but it's definitely worth it.
__________________
Jimmy Cao

Team 469 2006-2010 Student/Alumni
Team 830 2011-2012 Mentor