View Single Post
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-01-2010, 19:56
DinerKid's Avatar
DinerKid DinerKid is offline
Registered User
AKA: Zac
FRC #1768 (Nashoba Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: MA
Posts: 73
DinerKid is a glorious beacon of lightDinerKid is a glorious beacon of lightDinerKid is a glorious beacon of lightDinerKid is a glorious beacon of lightDinerKid is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Mecanum Drive Killing Battery

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH View Post
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.
With that being said... did it work out in your situation that you were running the CIMs with the desired current and still running at a decent speed? obviously you can design the CIM's to run at any current but if doing that means you are going to drive at a snails pace then it is kind of pointless. Was the robot that you are talking about able to drive with average speed without drawing too much current or was it slow?