View Single Post
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-01-2010, 19:17
EricH's Avatar
EricH EricH is offline
New year, new team
FRC #1197 (Torbots)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 19,741
EricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Mecanum Drive Killing Battery

Quote:
Originally Posted by DinerKid View Post
I think what it really boils down to is how you are running for CIMs. obviously if you are stalling 4 CIMs you are at something like 428 amps, WAY over the breaker. If you can run all four at 15 amps each then you should fine from the graph we were looking at earlier.

I am still interested in hearing about other teams experiences with running 4 CIMs on drive preferably on a mecanum chassis but if not that is fine as well.
Pretty much right on. I don't remember exactly where on the curve you want to design for with CIMs, but you do want to design them right.

330 ran a 4-CIM drive between 2005 and 2008; I'm not sure about last year. No issues whatsoever with batteries (other than keeping them all charged during hours-long practice sessions in '07 and '08). All the robots were 6WD.

But, in 2005, the competition robot was designed to accept a mecanum drive. The Kitbot was equipped with that system for testing purposes; it didn't make it onto the competition robot. There were no battery issues on that robot.
__________________
Past teams:
2003-2007: FRC0330 BeachBots
2008: FRC1135 Shmoebotics
2012: FRC4046 Schroedinger's Dragons

"Rockets are tricky..."--Elon Musk