Best Drive Train

[josmee443]

What type of drive train do you guys think is the best in terms of speed, pushing force, agility (mobility), durability, and overall efficiency? Typically, my team uses regular Tank drive, though we did experiment with Mecanums a few years back.

Drivetrains:

Tank
Mecanum
Holonomic
Slide
Swerve
Any others?

[peirvine]

Where is the Jump Drive?

[dodar]

Ya, the 2 big names you left off were Octocanum and Nonadrive.

[Oblarg]

Swerve has always seemed to me like an unambiguous favorite if you have a good, light design and the resources to pull it off cleanly.

This offseason, 4464 is going to be looking at designing nonadrive/octanum, as that seems reasonably within our machining capabilities (we can do lasercut 1/4'' delrin, which ought to be sufficient for the wheel modules if they're designed properly) and offers a significant, strict increase in performance over slide drive/mecanum.

[Anupam Goli]

100% of all nine-sided drive base robots have won einstein.

[Oblarg]

Originally Posted by Wing

100% of all nine-sided drive base robots have won einstein.

I chuckled.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Whatever works for your strategy.

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

Whatever works for your strategy.

Quoted for truth. It took me a while to learn this, but in FRC, there is no universal "best" anything. Whatever works best for your team is going to give you the best results (that being said, 10 wheel nonacanumswerve drive isn't the best drivetrain).

[Oblarg]

Originally Posted by Andrew Lawrence

that being said, 10 wheel nonacanumswerve drive isn't the best drivetrain

Some intrepid CADer should take the initiative and draw up a design of this for all of our entertainment.

[stingray27]

Isn't tank drive the naming convention for the style of controls? Either way, if your using tank drive you MUST drop those center wheels. Otherwise the drive system will be useless because you wont be able to maneuver well...

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by jwfoss

...and is within the resources (cost, machining, etc) for your team.

Shouldn't those factor into your strategy?

Originally Posted by stingray27

Isn't tank drive the naming convention for the style of controls? Either way, if your using tank drive you MUST drop those center wheels. Otherwise the drive system will be useless because you wont be able to maneuver well...

NOT true at all. If your wheel base is wider than it is long... or actually, just read Chris' paper http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/1443

[CENTURION]

Originally Posted by Oblarg

Some intrepid CADer should take the initiative and draw up a design of this for all of our entertainment.

I'd love to, but first, I think I need to figure out just what that means...

Nine swerve pods, each with an octacanum rocker, and an extra set of sideways omniwheels?

[Oblarg]

Originally Posted by CENTURION

I'd love to, but first, I think I need to figure out just what that means...

Nine swerve pods, each with an octacanum rocker, and an extra set of sideways omniwheels?

Sounds legit.

[josmee443]

Originally Posted by CENTURION

I'd love to, but first, I think I need to figure out just what that means...

Nine swerve pods, each with an octacanum rocker, and an extra set of sideways omniwheels?

Well, that escalated quickly.

[runneals]

Originally Posted by jbsmithtx

Saves motors, time, and is incredibly easy to use. If you want a truly great swerve, you have to use 8 motors, which is a lot of the motors you have and use. An octocanum or butterfly is just as maneuverable and only uses 4 motors, but there is no pushing power to the side. Why is pushing power on the side needed? And as said, too much easier. Swerve is cool but fairly wasteful.

Back to the original post, as stated there is no perfect or best drivetrain. Discuss what is needed (maneuverability for an intricate field, or pushing power for obstacles).

Well put. I think the "best" drivetrain is one that is KISS'ed to fit YOUR needs. Sure you could spend the whole off season developing a super advanced wheel and drivetrain, but when push comes to shove, the simplest and easiest drivetrain will *almost* always excel the more complicated drives. As I stated earlier, there are more things that can (and will) go wrong in a more complex drive.
Another thing to consider for the "best" drivetrain is size and weight. I believe that the one listed below is a bit overkill. A robot should *generally* need only 4 "modules", which reduces a lot of weight and a lot of those "hole"y robots.

Originally Posted by CENTURION

Nine swerve pods, each with an octacanum rocker, and an extra set of sideways omniwheels?