|
Re: 6WD Chassis Stiffness vs. Maneuverability
JVN:
4 cims into slightly modified AndyMark gen1 shifters set up for 7 fps and 14fps (not sure on top end, I have slept too many times since then). We were going to add a FP to the outside drivetrain but needed it for the elevator. Jim Z's kids are actually the chassis crew, and mine were responsible for the elevator. I did the chassis turning power calculations to see if we were missing something in our optimization process. Our first wheel selection had the driver full power on the outside stick and partial revers power only on the inside side. I did a lot of Dynamics calculations because I thought Overdrive would be even faster than it was. I thought that robots like 148 might be capable of up to 20 laps with a clean track. I was going to post some of the power calculation stuff until i saw 1114 driving around even faster with 6 grippy wheels.
s_forbes:
The sandbags were laying on top of frame members that are 5 inches from the floor, and were duct taped in place (got to use duct tape during build season since it isn't allowed later). They are flat 25lb bags that when flat are only 1 inch thick. A ballasted chassis can tell you wahat Vmax and acceleration rates are for your robot. If you have poor theoretical top speed to actual top speed this can be a symptom of drivetrain efficiency issues (mis-aligned chain, or bound gear-sets).
33 CG height:
As far as CG height goes, our CG is actually about the same height as 254. 33 looks deceptively top-heavy due to the poly-panels. We do get a very high CG when the elevator goes up, but otherwise about 70% of our weight is below 7" and another 15% below 1foot line.
|