|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: WCD vs Standard
Quote:
|
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WCD vs Standard
No outer framing. Basically eliminates about 86" of outer railing (assuming a 37" long by 27" wide bot). Center wheel is direct drive, so less chain (6 chains per average 6WD, 4 for your average 6WD WCD).
|
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WCD vs Standard
WCD's are known to be lighter but they aren't always lighter.
![]() |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: WCD vs Standard
Quote:
Nothing stops a team from direct driving on a standard chassis, and a standard chassis does not require bearing blocks. |
|
#5
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: WCD vs Standard
Okay, new questions to ask.
In my WCD design I have designed the wheels to be far enough from the outside to allow for interchangeable wheel sizes of 4in, 6in, and 8in. Is this a good idea? I have read somewhere that you use 4in wheels to save weight, go faster, and keep your wheels as far to the outside as possible. Is this true? Should I design my WCD to use one type of wheel? Also, can you weld the AM Flanged bearings to standard aluminum wall? (6061 I think). Thanks! |
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: WCD vs Standard
Generally speaking the bearings are pressed into the alum, or sometimes held in place with super glue if needed.
|
|
#7
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: WCD vs Standard
Quote:
The smaller wheels allow for smaller gear ratios and sometimes fewer reductions in the gearbox, this usually results in a more lightweight gearbox. I do not know about keeping the wheels as far out as possible as a motivation for smaller wheels, I would usually try to do that anyways regardless of wheel size (just my preference no real reasoning on my part behind it). |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: WCD vs Standard
Don't weld or weld near bearings. The grease has a bad habit of lighting on fire.
Quote:
Press fitting refers to having a hole that's just slightly smaller than the diameter of the bearing, so when you press it in, it doesn't come out. It's kind of tough to figure out what size hole to make and then make it accurately (within a few tenths). Last edited by Gray Adams : 01-10-2012 at 23:09. |
|
#9
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: WCD vs Standard
Well, good thing I asked, thanks!
|
|
#10
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: WCD vs Standard
Quote:
Typically, teams press fit bearing, as opposed to welding them. |
|
#11
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: WCD vs Standard
Quote:
And what is "press fitting"? Could you elaborate. |
|
#12
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: WCD vs Standard
Quote:
|
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WCD vs Standard
Ok, multiple things:
1. If you need to hold in a bearing that is not a press fit the standard approach is to use bearing loctite, not glue or welding. Although glue is a much better idea than welding. But why are so keen on holding in your bearings? 2. A press fit is not necessarily undersized, it could also be exact size. The difference between press and slip fit depends on surface finish as well as hole size. If you have a hole that you made exact size via a rat tail file chances are that's not going to be a slip fit. I caution you if you press in your bearings, too tight a fit can make a bearing seize up. 3. I would not suggest having a drivetrain with swap-out wheels with the size variation that you're talking about. If you have clearance for a 8" wheel but you use a 4" you're just not utilizing your frame space, the idea is to get the wheels close to the ends of the frame. There is no way you can swap out a 8" wheel with a 4" without changing the gear ratio. The fact that you want to do this makes me think that you didn't fully plan out your ratios and wheel sizes to your desired torque/speed. I suggest you calculate your drivetrains speeds using your different wheel sizes and you'll see how big of a difference wheel size makes. 4. The advantage of small wheels is that they're light, they lower your CG and they require less reduction. Don't use them unless you calculate your robots speed using them, or you might end up with a very slow bot. |
|
#14
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: WCD vs Standard
Quote:
I can't think of another drive that would be lighter than a WCD other than a super pocketed sheet drive. I'm curious to see the weight comparison and sheet drive. But WCD is decently light due to the fact: -No outer Railing -Minimal amount of parts. -Smaller parts: Wheels/Sprockets/Gearboxes etc.... We switched over to WCD in the fall of 2010. Never looked back (thanks 973!), its such a nice system that 254/968 has perfected over the years. -RC |
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: WCD vs Standard
While not the traditional wcd, doing one with fixed wheels and belts would without a doubt result in the lightest drivesystem in FIRST.
That said there is really no right or wrong answer. Do what works best for you. If your main manufacturing resources are sheetmetal then WCD might not be the best choice. It is possible and we have actually run a sheet WCD before but it's not the best use of resources. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|