View Single Post
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 04-05-2009, 17:58
tdlrali tdlrali is offline
Registered User
FRC #0469 (Las Guerrillas)
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: MI
Posts: 377
tdlrali has much to be proud oftdlrali has much to be proud oftdlrali has much to be proud oftdlrali has much to be proud oftdlrali has much to be proud oftdlrali has much to be proud oftdlrali has much to be proud oftdlrali has much to be proud of
Re: pic: FRC-34 2009 Swerve Module w/CIM (Front View)

"anything over 360 of motion is overkill"
not at all, you get a much better response time with full rotation, since worst-case for full rotation is 90deg (you can always find the closest goal within a max of 90deg), whereas the worst-case for non-full rotation is twice that.
also, with non-full-rotation, think of the situation where you're approaching the limit from one side. as you pass through the limit, the module has to turn 180deg (or however far), which makes for really weird driving. this problem doesn't exist with full rotation

for wire wrap, in 07 and 08 (when we did non-coaxial, with cims in the modules), we simply kept track of the number of full rotations, wrote them to the eeprom (persistent across reboots), and had a software limit in the number of rotations. the "unspinning" happened either on button press or automatically during idle time (no joystick inputs).

Last edited by tdlrali : 04-05-2009 at 18:00.
Reply With Quote