P.S. could we get Kanagasabapathy added to the spell check? or will it not handle words that big? :) - Holtzman [more]
 Chief Delphi "Gearing for speed" criticism
 CD-Media CD-Spy
 portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

#1
08-19-2012, 08:37 PM
 Manoel Registered User FRC #0383 (Brazilian Machine) Team Role: Mentor Join Date: Jun 2001 Rookie Year: 2000 Location: Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil Posts: 608
"Gearing for speed" criticism

Top speed is one of the most common metrics used in the FIRST Robotics Competition; yet, the problem is that the great majority of teams design their drive trains considering only the steady-state speed of the system, easily calculated by determining the operating point of the torque-speed curve of the motor (sometimes using a "desired" operating point such as the rule-of-thumb 75% of free speed, seldom using the wheel's coefficient of friction). Given the power-to-weight ratio we're allowed by the rules, the time constant of our robots is not negligible and, thus, it is important to consider the dynamics of the system.
From time to time some people do point out to unexperienced designers that "yeah, your final speed is great, but how long does it take to get there?". This remark only gives a qualitative analysis, though. I propose a different way to look at the problem: How far will your robot travel in x seconds?

Consider a 2012 FRC robot with maximum weight (120 lbs + 15 lbs battery and 15 lbs bumpers) and this configuration:
4 CIM motors driving two CIMple gearboxes, N (N doesn't really matter as long as they are all powered) HiGrip FIRST Wheels with a 26 tooth sprocket attached. The following graph demonstrates the distance traveled in three seconds by a robot with varying coefficients of friction (from 0.8 to 1.5) and gearbox sprocket (8 - OK, no such thing - to 26 teeth):

(distance equal to zero means the gearing is such that the robot cannot overcome friction)

It can be seen that, for each coefficient of friction, there's an optimal sprocket selection that will make the robot move as far as possible in a given time frame. AndyMark states that the coefficient of friction of the HiGrip wheels is around 0.95-1.0*. Let's take a look at the distance a robot travels in three seconds using those wheels:

The gearing selection by AndyMark, with a 12-teeth sprocket, is pretty close to the optimal one, 10-teeth (in a three-second run, that's about 9 inches you lose in the worst-case). I would love to hear from Andy or Mark if that's just a fortunate coincidence or if they did in fact take that into account. If so, why choose the 12-tooth over the 10-tooth sprocket?
Another thing that can be readily seen is that if a good-willing but uninformed designer decides to "increase" the speed of his robot by buying a larger sprocket he actually ends up with a robot that covers LESS ground in the same amount of time.

* Notes on coefficient of friction: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=107759
__________________
Manoel Flores da Cunha
Mentor
Brazilian Machine
Team # 383
#2
08-20-2012, 08:18 AM
 quinxorin Mentor now :( AKA: Ian Pudney FRC #0862 (Lightning Robotics) Team Role: Mentor Join Date: Jan 2009 Rookie Year: 2009 Location: Lightning Robotics Posts: 148
Re: "Gearing for speed" criticism

You are quite right in that top speed isn't that much of an issue. The standard 12.75:1 Toughbox offers a good speed - going above that is usually pointless. In 2011, my team felt that we needed speed very bad, so we built a super fast drive train. Unfortunately, that was the wrong speed - we could go from one end of the field to the other before our arm could lift up to score. Whoops.
__________________
"Sed res docuit id verum esse, quod in carminibus Appius ait, fabrum esse suae quemque fortunae."
- Every man is the architect of his own fortune.
#3
08-20-2012, 08:30 AM
 JamesCH95 Hardcore Dork AKA: JCH FRC #0095 (The Grasshoppers) Team Role: Engineer Join Date: Dec 2004 Rookie Year: 2001 Location: Enfield, NH Posts: 1,794
Re: "Gearing for speed" criticism

Are you assuming that the robot is traction-limited all the time?
__________________
Theory is a nice place, I'd like to go there one day, I hear everything works there.

Maturity is knowing you were an idiot, common sense is trying to not be an idiot, wisdom is knowing that you will still be an idiot.
#4
08-20-2012, 08:44 AM
 JVN @JohnVNeun AKA: John Vielkind-Neun FRC #0148 (Robowranglers) Team Role: Engineer Join Date: May 2001 Rookie Year: 2000 Location: Greenville, Tx Posts: 3,159
Re: "Gearing for speed" criticism

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Manoel From time to time some people do point out to unexperienced designers that "yeah, your final speed is great, but how long does it take to get there?". This remark only gives a qualitative analysis, though. I propose a different way to look at the problem: How far will your robot travel in x seconds?
Manoel,
I agree that this is a valuable benchmark, and that the majority of users don't think about optimizing acceleration/top speed for "real field" usage.

I'm curious about more detail of your analysis. Can you share the acceleration model which you're using for these calculations?

-John
#5
08-20-2012, 08:45 AM
 JVN @JohnVNeun AKA: John Vielkind-Neun FRC #0148 (Robowranglers) Team Role: Engineer Join Date: May 2001 Rookie Year: 2000 Location: Greenville, Tx Posts: 3,159
Re: "Gearing for speed" criticism

Quote:
 Originally Posted by quinxorin You are quite right in that top speed isn't that much of an issue. The standard 12.75:1 Toughbox offers a good speed - going above that is usually pointless. In 2011, my team felt that we needed speed very bad, so we built a super fast drive train. Unfortunately, that was the wrong speed - we could go from one end of the field to the other before our arm could lift up to score. Whoops.
Sounds like your arm was designed incorrectly for your robot's match rhythm.
#6
08-20-2012, 08:50 AM
 quinxorin Mentor now :( AKA: Ian Pudney FRC #0862 (Lightning Robotics) Team Role: Mentor Join Date: Jan 2009 Rookie Year: 2009 Location: Lightning Robotics Posts: 148
Re: "Gearing for speed" criticism

Quote:
 Originally Posted by JVN Sounds like your arm was designed incorrectly for your robot's match rhythm.
Yes it most definitely was. The mechanism that operated it is now on display on our Wall of Shame, such that future generations are not doomed to repeat the mistake.
__________________
"Sed res docuit id verum esse, quod in carminibus Appius ait, fabrum esse suae quemque fortunae."
- Every man is the architect of his own fortune.
#7
08-20-2012, 09:14 AM
 s_forbes anonymous internet person FRC #0842 (Falcon Robotics) Team Role: Engineer Join Date: Jan 2006 Rookie Year: 2006 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 1,096
Re: "Gearing for speed" criticism

Manoel, how did you factor the coefficient of friction into your calculations? I've never seen a robot slip its wheels when accelerating with the gear ratios discussed here, so traction should not be a concern.

Good discussion, it seems like many teams design for land speed racing instead of drag racing.
#8
08-20-2012, 10:05 AM
 IKE Not so Custom User Title AKA: Isaac Rife no team (N/A) Team Role: Mechanical Join Date: Jan 2008 Rookie Year: 2003 Location: Michigan Posts: 2,131
Re: "Gearing for speed" criticism

Great job with your analysis. We overgeared initially this past year. Modeling currents and time at currents is also a big deal. When geared too fast, you spend a lot of time in the lower half of the motor model which allows for high currents which is difficult on the power system, battery, and motors heating up.
#9
08-20-2012, 10:35 AM
 Gdeaver Registered User FRC #1640 Team Role: Mentor Join Date: Mar 2004 Rookie Year: 2001 Location: West Chester, Pa. Posts: 1,346
Re: "Gearing for speed" criticism

To go along with this should be what is a reasonable top velocity? I see many posts where teams gear for above 10 fps. Can a driver really control a bot at these top ends? How much time per match is max v needed. I know this is game dependent, but I doubt most teams really need above 8 fps. This also ties into joy stick mapping. I submit that lower gearing gives a more precise control of the bot. Question. On a non wide open field and a robot geared to a 6to 8 fps top end, do you really need a 2 speed gear box? Our top end is about 9fps and single speed. We don't see the need for higher speed in most games and I've at times have pushed for a lower top end. I'll take acceleration and low current draw any day over a high top end.
#10
08-20-2012, 10:51 AM
 Brandon Holley Chase perfection. Catch excellence. AKA: Let's bring CD back to the way it used to be FRC #0125 (NU-TRONs, Team #11 Alumni (GO MORT)) Team Role: Engineer Join Date: Jan 2004 Rookie Year: 2001 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 2,577
Re: "Gearing for speed" criticism

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Gdeaver To go along with this should be what is a reasonable top velocity? I see many posts where teams gear for above 10 fps. Can a driver really control a bot at these top ends? How much time per match is max v needed. I know this is game dependent, but I doubt most teams really need above 8 fps. This also ties into joy stick mapping. I submit that lower gearing gives a more precise control of the bot. Question. On a non wide open field and a robot geared to a 6to 8 fps top end, do you really need a 2 speed gear box? Our top end is about 9fps and single speed. We don't see the need for higher speed in most games and I've at times have pushed for a lower top end. I'll take acceleration and low current draw any day over a high top end.
I see this argument a lot for a reason not to have an excessively fast robot. However, this is where some teams have found a leg up on the competition- figuring out how to control a robot at high(er) speeds.

One example is Cheesy Drive, developed by members of 254. We've used the framework for that type of drive control the past 2 seasons on our robots. It is extraordinary how well you can control a robot moving at 18 ft/s (which was the top speed of our 2011 robot). Dipping into the alley (again, 2011) or making a nice fast arc around an opponent are all very easily done once the drive system has been properly tuned.

Manoel- Very nice work! I'm looking forward to seeing some of the discussion that comes out of it.

-Brando
__________________
MORT (Team 11) '01-'05 :
-2005 New Jersey Regional Chairman's Award Winners
-2013 MORT Hall of Fame Inductee

NUTRONs (Team 125) '05-???
2007 Boston Regional Winners
2008 & 2009 Boston Regional Driving Tomorrow's Technology Award
2010 Boston Regional Creativity Award
2011 Bayou Regional Finalists, Innovation in Control Award, Boston Regional Finalists, Industrial Design Award
2012 New York City Regional Winners, Boston Regional Finalists, IRI Mentor of the Year
2013 Orlando Regional Finalists, Industrial Design Award, Boston Regional Winners, Pine Tree Regional Finalists
2014 Rhode Island District Winners, Excellence in Engineering Award, Northeastern University District Winners, Industrial Design Award, Pine Tree District Chairman's Award, Pine Tree District Winners
2015 South Florida Regional Chairman's Award, NU District Winners, NEDCMP Industrial Design Award, Hopper Division Finalists, Hopper/Newton Gracious Professionalism Award

Last edited by Brandon Holley : 08-20-2012 at 10:54 AM.

 Thread Tools Display Modes Rate This Thread Linear Mode Rate This Thread: 5 : Excellent 4 : Good 3 : Average 2 : Bad 1 : Terrible

 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 User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Announcements     User Announcements FIRST     General Forum         FIRST E-Mail Blast Archive     Rumor Mill     Career     Robot Showcase Technical     Technical Discussion     Robotics Education and Curriculum     Motors     Electrical         CAN     Programming         NI LabVIEW         C/C++         Java         Python     Control System         FRC Control System         Sensors     Pneumatics     Kit & Additional Hardware     CAD         Inventor         SolidWorks         Pro ENGINEER / Creo     IT / Communications         3D Animation and Competition         Website Design/Showcase         Videography and Photography         Computer Graphics     National Instruments LabVIEW and Data Acquisition         LabView and Data Acquisition Competition     Awards         Chairman's Award     Rules/Strategy         Scouting         You Make The Call     Team Organization         Fundraising         Starting New Teams         Finding A Team         College Teams     Championship Event     Regional Competitions     District Events     Off-Season Events     Thanks and/or Congrats     FRC Game Design     OCCRA         OCCRA Q&A         OCCRA Programming Other     Unsung FIRST Heroes     Chit-Chat         Games/Trivia             Fantasy FIRST     Car Nack's Corner     College & University Education     Dean Kamen's Inventions     FIRST-related Organizations         Western Region Robotics Forum         Southern California Regional Robotics Forum         FIRST Interactive Rural SupporT         FIRST Scouting Network         FIRSTwiki         The Blue Alliance             Video Archives     FIRST In the News...     FIRST Lego League         Lego Mindstorm Discussion     FIRST Tech Challenge     VEX         VEX Robotics Competition         VEX IQ     Televised Robotics     Math and Science         NASA Discussion ChiefDelphi.com Website     CD Forum Support     Extra Discussion Old Forum Archives     1999     2000     2001

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:30 PM.

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

 -- English (12 hour) -- English (24 hour) Contact Us - Chief Delphi - Rules - Archive - Top