|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
pic: 1881 tube interface idea
|
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: pic: 1881 tube interface idea
You should use a threaded rod like the one that is provided in the kop, it would be easy.
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: 1881 tube interface idea
You could also make the joints of the hand spring loaded and have steel cable retract the fingers in until you line up and then unwind the cable to have the springs pop open the hand.
|
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: pic: 1881 tube interface idea
In addition to the other ideas,
you could simply attach a pneumatic cylinder to the back of finger supports or you could use the same cylinder to pull the wire that edthegeek proposed. pneumatics are usually the way to go for grippers because they don't loosen or back drive when they apply force. just my thoughts |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: 1881 tube interface idea
one word: Baller!
|
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: pic: 1881 tube interface idea
Now that is cool
Just make sure that there are no sharp edges![]() |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: 1881 tube interface idea
Once your place the ringer on the post, how do you plan on getting the manipulator back off without hitting anything. Assuming there is allready a ringer on the goal you are going for, would there be any problems getting the manipulator off?
Otherwise, very cool looking design! |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: 1881 tube interface idea
We once we release the tube the drive said he know how he is going to do it, so i trust in him.
|
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: 1881 tube interface idea
This was one of my early ideas, but after seeing the round peice of diamond plate at the end of the posts, I quickly discarded it. There is about 1" of clearance between the ring and the plate on the post. And seeing as the "fingers" that touch the ring have to be over 1" or something (I don't know the specific rule) that wouldn't really work.
How you do intend on getting spoilers off of the posts, too? That would be a bit more difficult than necessary. |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: pic: 1881 tube interface idea
my team is thinking about using something like that, but with three grabber things
|
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: 1881 tube interface idea
Quote:
Well if i do remember the center plate on the post is 10'' the inside of the tube is 13''. This leaves us with 3'' to play with. the fingers are not in excess of an inch in that regard. meaning with fingers in place we have little bit more than an inch left over. Also a side note the image is upside down. |
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: 1881 tube interface idea
I forgot to mention the "all the way around" part.
![]() There are ways to make it work, but the only way I can think of is holding the ring above the plate at some angle, then dropping it so the top gets past the plate and lands on the post, while the bottom swings below. That would require a bit extra height when going for the top post. I think 2 fingers would be better than 3. It would make it easier to get spoilers off of the post. Also, with the 3 fingers, it might be harder to back away once they release the tube. They were intended to slightly fit around the plate, and once you contract them to release the tube, they wont fit past the plate again. |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: pic: 1881 tube interface idea
Just a side note, remember this rule when you are scoring
Quote:
-Dan Karol |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| pic: Team #8's Tube Interface | dfukuba | Extra Discussion | 5 | 13-01-2007 02:04 |
| pic: Height on top of a tube | Jeff Rodriguez | Extra Discussion | 21 | 13-01-2007 01:46 |
| pic: Team #8's Tube Interface | dfukuba | Extra Discussion | 13 | 13-01-2007 01:16 |
| pic: 1881 new gearbox design | GMAdan | Extra Discussion | 7 | 21-12-2006 01:59 |
| I²C Interface on PIC | CBM3 | Programming | 2 | 01-11-2003 22:28 |