|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Engineering Challenge- Spring Loaded Kicker Edition
Working through a possible issue with our practice bot, I thought it made an interesting engineering challenge.
So you are at competition with your spring loaded kicker. You have a motor that winds the kicker to the motor/gearbox stall point (motor stops before mechanical limits) with a quick release mechanism that allows the kicker to kick. You kick several shots and notice that the it would be good to kick the ball a little further (about 10%). All you can do is add or subtract spring rate. Should you: A. More spring rate = more betterer! B. Less rate is more when it comes to springs! C. Nothing, no matter what you do it will stay the same. D. Ask the pit admin for some of those frictionless bearings you've heard so much about. E. Blame the programmer. Please do the math: |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Engineering Challenge- Spring Loaded Kicker Edition
I choose F (The Big Orange Hammer) because thats the way we do things on the killer bees (although my second choice would be E).
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Engineering Challenge- Spring Loaded Kicker Edition
Clarification: when you say spring rate, you're referring to the spring constant, right? In other words, bigger spring rate means bigger value of k? In that case. . .
If the motor cannot fully compress the spring, then getting a bigger, harder spring is not going to allow the motor to store more potential energy. In that case the limiting factor is the motor, so just modifying the spring's strength won't do anything for you. So, answer C it is. Right? |
|
#4
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Engineering Challenge- Spring Loaded Kicker Edition
Try again. Highlight below for a hint. As IKE said, please do the math. If you show your calculations we may be able to help you see your mistakes.
The maximum force is the constant in this set of equations |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Engineering Challenge- Spring Loaded Kicker Edition
|
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Engineering Challenge- Spring Loaded Kicker Edition
Quote:
As far as the silver text goes... your may be thinking in the right direction, but some more math would help. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Engineering Challenge- Spring Loaded Kicker Edition
My guess is c.
The motor can give the spring potential energy, and changing the length or rate of the spring will not change the potential energy the motor is giving away. With the same potential energy, the spring will always kick with the same speed (energy calculations). I hope I'm right.. never had any "challenges" like this ![]() |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Engineering Challenge- Spring Loaded Kicker Edition
This was inspired by a Thundershicken that headed South for the Winter which was inspired by an amatuer robot guy that turned pro that was inspired by...
|
|
#9
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Engineering Challenge- Spring Loaded Kicker Edition
Bryan, you are wrong. It has nothing to do with my code. I blame the mechanical team.
|
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Engineering Challenge- Spring Loaded Kicker Edition
Decrease spring rate and preload the springs to produce a more constant spring force.
When graphing Force vs displacement, without preloading you get a triangle. Preloading the springs makes it a trapazoid or in an ideal world a rectangle. The area under the curve represents Work. More work = more kick Last edited by ADZDEBLICK : 24-03-2010 at 16:13. |
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Engineering Challenge- Spring Loaded Kicker Edition
Quote:
~ |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Engineering Challenge- Spring Loaded Kicker Edition
G: Not enough design parameters are given. More information is needed.
|
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Engineering Challenge- Spring Loaded Kicker Edition
Analyzing the problem:
P=MV You want full travel out of your system to give you the most time for your mass to accelerate and have the largest velocity and therefore momentum (P) at impact. Analyzing the choices: A. More springs Cause your motor to stall with less displacement on the spring. Most likely an equal force, but there is less distance between your kicker and the ball for the mass of your kicker to accelerate. B. Less springs More stroke -> more time for the mass to accelerate -> more momentum at impact -> farther shot C. Do nothing What kind of engineering is this? D. Frictionless bearings Those'd help but I don't think the pit admin table has any. E. Blame the programmer As much as I'd like to.... Last edited by Mike Schreiber : 24-03-2010 at 16:19. |
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Engineering Challenge- Spring Loaded Kicker Edition
Quote:
What if that's not the case? What if your kicker is designed to work without significant mass and without any travel time before contacting the ball? In other words, you have a relatively mass-less kicker already in contact with the ball when you start to accelerate it. That's essentially our design, and it works great (clears 1 bump easily, scores very well). Think of a slingshot, and you'll have a good idea of how the physics of it works. Now, everyone should keep in mind that a robot cannot create energy. The form of the energy can change, but it can't be created. In this situation, a motor is able to exert a certain amount of torque (which can be translated into a linear force very easily) before it stalls. In short, this means it can pull back the kicker a distance x such that the linear force the motor is outputting is equal to kx. The stall torque for any given motor is a constant. So, what do we do with k? Well, if we increase k, we get a shorter draw but the same amount of force. If we decrease k, we get a longer draw, but the same amount of force. In the end, the force (remember F=ma?) remains the same (as does mass and acceleration). The only thing we change is the draw. So, does increased draw help in this situation? Well, that all depends on the design of the kicker ![]() We ran into this problem early in the season. With our design, increasing the draw really doesn't get you anything. Adding a second motor and more springs, however... ![]() |
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Engineering Challenge- Spring Loaded Kicker Edition
I was making the assumption that this problem was based off of the Killer Bee's robot which does have a distance between the kicker and the ball in which the mass accelerates.
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| spring loaded launcher | sciguy125 | Technical Discussion | 6 | 17-01-2006 22:42 |
| Spring-loaded claw | Anubuss | Technical Discussion | 8 | 21-01-2005 15:32 |
| Legality of Spring Loaded Pistons | Yan Wang | Pneumatics | 13 | 19-02-2004 17:20 |
| Spring-Loaded Pistons | TwoEdge47 | Rules/Strategy | 2 | 30-01-2003 21:36 |
| Grey Hindge spring loaded | archiver | 2000 | 0 | 23-06-2002 23:10 |