CIM Motor Sacrifice

[sanddrag]

Originally Posted by Djur

I'm coming from a team that has only ever used mecanum while I've been on it, so I'm probably exaggerating by a lot. But my omni/mecanum statement still stands.

Fair enough. I see your point now.

[Garrett.d.w]

Back to OP, this year we are placing a BB 775 with a CIMulator gearbox in places where a CIM would be normally used.
You could do this on your drivetrain or anywhere else really. If you are going to build a ball pitcher, I would use the 775s and keep the more powerful CIMs for drive.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Garrett.d.w

Back to OP, this year we are placing a BB 775 with a CIMulator gearbox in places where a CIM would be normally used.
You could do this on your drivetrain or anywhere else really. If you are going to build a ball pitcher, I would use the 775s and keep the more powerful CIMs for drive.

This is EXACTLY what I would do.

[Mk.32]

Originally Posted by waialua359

This is EXACTLY what I would do.

If we go with the shooter, probably what we would do.
Use the FP/775 and leave the CIMS in drive.

[ks_mumupsi]

In general I think you will see a lot of 775 based shooters. This years motor allowance gives a lot of variability of what you can and cannot do, you can go 775 cimulators for the drive or the shooter/ vice versa.

[Peter Matteson]

We have faaaaaaaaaaaaaar more motor power than we ever had available in the past this year. If you you can't figure out how to use the 22 available motor to make all you mechanisms and drive work then I would love to know what you're planning. We may not have the mini-bike motors we had during 2006 but we have far more power available with the replacements.

[PayneTrain]

We might try the cimulator for launch, and then change over to an FP set once BaneBots breaks my heart all over again.

I gave my bot to you, BaneBots, and then you just short it all away? *tears*

[JamesCH95]

Assuming the shooter in a given robot is higher than the drive train motors (likely) I think that using the 775s to shoot is a good choice because they weigh about 2lbs less than a CIM. Keeping weight low in the robot will be very important for balancing and going over the barrier.

We're planning on having our shooter at the top of the robot, so keeping 4lbs at the bottom will help make the robot more stable while only sacrificing a little bit of shooting power.

[Grim Tuesday]

Wait, when was it decided that 775's are better than FP's?

[Hawiian Cadder]

Our plan is to put 4 CIMs in the drive-train. With single motor drive and trying to balance, especially attempting to push other robots on the ramp (single person controlling the balance instead of 2 or even 3. This is accomplished by a low level of stall by the other balancing robot against your robot, and then back-driving or sliding the other robot to control the balance.) would be all but impossible without either 2 speed gearboxes or a 4 CIM drive. I would recommend the CIM SIM from andymark as an alternative power method for flywheels, belts, conveyors, and other high power systems. A pair of 500 series motors will actually perform better than a single CIM in most cases, and with the gearbox is comparable on weight. I try to avoid the RS-775, because they don't offer the same benefit/weight as the other motors, designed properly, the fragility of some of the 500 series motors wont be a problem, and there are more gearbox options which allows for the possibility of keeping it lighter with more power.

[commonsense]

Keep the CIMs on the wheels. Put a CIM-SIM for your launcher. Especially for maneuvering onto the bridges at the end, you will not want two motor tank drive, seeing as the bridges are flush to the wall.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by Peter Matteson

We have faaaaaaaaaaaaaar more motor power than we ever had available in the past this year. If you you can't figure out how to use the 22 available motor to make all you mechanisms and drive work then I would love to know what you're planning. We may not have the mini-bike motors we had during 2006 but we have far more power available with the replacements.

I'll be honest. I'm more worried about battery power droop than our motors. I believe you will see a lot of robots resetting 1.2 way through the match because they are running so many motors.

Just my 2 cents

[Peter Matteson]

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

I'll be honest. I'm more worried about battery power droop than our motors. I believe you will see a lot of robots resetting 1.2 way through the match because they are running so many motors.

Just my 2 cents

Completely agree with you. I've been waiting for them to do this for a few years because it makes sense to give more than we can use and force tradeoffs.

[Jon Stratis]

For your consideration... our prototype shooter managed to score fairly consistently from the key last night running off two cordless drills (which are closer to 550's than CIM's). With the plethora of motors this year, you could easily stick 4 BB motors on the shooter (and have enough motors for everything else you want to do), and get 1000W of power out of them for shooting. That's more power than two CIM's!

[Walter Deitzler]

Originally Posted by eagle33199

For your consideration... our prototype shooter managed to score fairly consistently from the key last night running off two cordless drills (which are closer to 550's than CIM's). With the plethora of motors this year, you could easily stick 4 BB motors on the shooter (and have enough motors for everything else you want to do), and get 1000W of power out of them for shooting. That's more power than two CIM's!

How far did it shoot? If two CIMS can accuratly shoot a ball farther than 4 BB's, there is an advantage right there.