Go to Post We do not pursue awards, we pursue greatness and the awards follow. - Sunshine [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > ChiefDelphi.com Website > Extra Discussion
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-12-2011, 15:44
Chris is me's Avatar
Chris is me Chris is me is offline
no bag, vex only, final destination
AKA: Pinecone
FRC #0228 (GUS Robotics); FRC #2170 (Titanium Tomahawks)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Glastonbury, CT
Posts: 7,768
Chris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Chris is me
Re: pic: I was bored... so I designed this.

I don't want to "slam" anyone who works this hard, so please don't take this the wrong way, but I think this system has a few problems.

First, your modules. Yes, cantilevered wheels offer easier access, but they are not the end-all be-all most important drivetrain feature in FRC. The reason my team cantilevers wheels is mainly for simplicity and weight. Cantilevering wheels in a swerve drive saves negligible weight (maybe a half pound?) and makes the whole wheel and module significantly worse supported.

In 2008, team 148 built modules much like yours, but with a fully supported wheel. Even then, the modules wore through bevel gears, I'm assuming due to the modules twisting causing excessive tip loading. You'll notice teams like 1625 and 1640, two popular coaxial swerve teams, go to great lengths to make their bevel gear setup rigid. 1625 used a "puzzle piece" method of connecting 1/4" plates while 1640 uses gussets to connect a piece of U-shaped extrusion together.

It also looks like your module support is a bit lacking. It looks like you have a single thrust bearing mounted to a piece of 1/8" metal plate supporting all of the forces on the module. That's a pretty extreme cantilever. A lot of teams use a lower support for at least extreme loading, or they support their modules in multiple places / over a wide area. Think carefully how you want to do this.

Swerve drives are tricky - that's why even well funded teams with many engineers don't get them right.
__________________
Mentor / Drive Coach: 228 (2016-?)
--2016 Waterbury SFs (with 3314, 3719), RIDE #2 Seed / Winners (with 1058, 6153), Carver QFs (with 503, 359, 4607)
Mentor / Consultant Person: 2170 (2017-?)
.
College Mentor: 2791 (2010-2015)
-- 2015 TVR Motorola Quality, FLR GM Industrial Design -- 2014 FLR Motorola Quality / SFs (with 341, 4930)
-- 2013 BAE Motorola Quality, WPI Regional #1 Seed / Delphi Excellence in Engineering / Finalists (with 20, 3182)
-- 2012 BAE Imagery / Finalists (with 1519, 885), CT Xerox Creativity / SFs (with 2168, 118)
Student: 1714 (2009) - 2009 MN 10K Lakes Regional Winners (with 2826, 2470)
2791 Build Season Photo Gallery - Look here for mechanism photos My Robotics Blog (Updated April 11 2014)
Reply With Quote
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:59.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi