Go to Post I have no clue. All I know is that every year the riddle in the clue has confused me but this year it is the lack of confusion that confuses me. - hallk [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Technical > Technical Discussion
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Closed Thread
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 14-12-2012, 10:42
jspatz1's Avatar
jspatz1 jspatz1 is offline
Registered User
AKA: Jeff
FRC #1986 (Team Titanium)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: Lee's Summit, MO
Posts: 835
jspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to jspatz1
Re: Elevators: Cascaded vs Continuous

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jared341 View Post
I have often heard that cascaded elevators require a return drum of a different diameter than the feed. But wouldn't the following work?

Each segment of the elevator can have a closed loop of belt/chain attaching it to the prior stage. It should be anchored at the top of the previous stage (or motor for the first stage), and the bottom of the next stage. It's important that the total length of the loop doesn't change as it travels up and down.

You still have the speed and force multiplier effect with each stage, but you won't have to worry different feed and return speeds.
My aging brain is not visualizing this, perhaps you could sketch it. The purpose of a return/take-up cable is to drive the elevator down as well as up. You could create a closed loop cable between the 2nd and 3rd stage, but it would not drive the 3rd stage. Remember that the lift cable for the 3rd stage is anchored to the 1st stage, not the 2nd. It therefore needs a corresponding return cable which is also based on the 1st stage (the 2X take-up). It is a closed loop overall, but not between stages.
We solved the 2X take-up issue by making our winch drum a 2-stage drum (photo) with the return stage 2X diameter of the payout stage. Made the cable rigging quite simple.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Dual Winch Drum.JPG
Views:	338
Size:	342.8 KB
ID:	13280  
__________________

Last edited by jspatz1 : 14-12-2012 at 11:42.
  #17   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 14-12-2012, 11:19
Jon Stratis's Avatar
Jon Stratis Jon Stratis is online now
Electrical/Programming Mentor
FRC #2177 (The Robettes)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,791
Jon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond reputeJon Stratis has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Elevators: Cascaded vs Continuous

Quote:
Originally Posted by jspatz1 View Post
We solved the 2X return cable issue by making our winch drum a 2-stage drum (photo) with the return stage 2X diameter of the payout stage. Made the cable rigging quite simple.
Funny, we did exactly the same thing when we did cascade!
__________________
2007 - Present: Mentor, 2177 The Robettes
LRI: North Star 2012-2016; Lake Superior 2013-2014; MN State Tournament 2013-2014, 2016; Galileo 2016; Iowa 2017
2015: North Star Regional Volunteer of the Year
2016: Lake Superior WFFA
  #18   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 14-12-2012, 12:43
Jared Russell's Avatar
Jared Russell Jared Russell is offline
Taking a year (mostly) off
FRC #0254 (The Cheesy Poofs), FRC #0341 (Miss Daisy)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,078
Jared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Elevators: Cascaded vs Continuous

Quote:
Originally Posted by jspatz1 View Post
My aging brain is not visualizing this, perhaps you could sketch it. The purpose of a return/take-up cable is to drive the elevator down as well as up. You could create a closed loop cable between the 2nd and 3rd stage, but it would not drive the 3rd stage. Remember that the lift cable for the 3rd stage is anchored to the 1st stage, not the 2nd. It therefore needs a corresponding return cable which is also based on the 1st stage (the 2X take-up). It is a closed loop overall, but not between stages.
We solved the 2X take-up issue by making our winch drum a 2-stage drum (photo) with the return stage 2X diameter of the payout stage. Made the cable rigging quite simple.
Here is a picture of what I was envisioning.

The motor is directly connected to a continuous belt/chain/cable around only the first stage which is anchored to the bottom of the second stage. Thus the motor can drive the second stage both up and down. The rest of the system is constrained based on these two moving parts.

Basically, it is a conventional cascade lift, attached to a cascade "lowering" system.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	cascade_elevator_closed_loop.png
Views:	735
Size:	19.6 KB
ID:	13281  
  #19   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 14-12-2012, 13:04
Wayne TenBrink's Avatar
Wayne TenBrink Wayne TenBrink is offline
<< (2008 Game Piece)
FRC #1918 (NC Gears)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Fremont, MI, USA
Posts: 527
Wayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond reputeWayne TenBrink has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Elevators: Cascaded vs Continuous

Quote:
Originally Posted by jspatz1 View Post
My aging brain is not visualizing this, perhaps you could sketch it. The purpose of a return/take-up cable is to drive the elevator down as well as up. You could create a closed loop cable between the 2nd and 3rd stage, but it would not drive the 3rd stage. Remember that the lift cable for the 3rd stage is anchored to the 1st stage, not the 2nd. It therefore needs a corresponding return cable which is also based on the 1st stage (the 2X take-up). It is a closed loop overall, but not between stages.
We solved the 2X take-up issue by making our winch drum a 2-stage drum (photo) with the return stage 2X diameter of the payout stage. Made the cable rigging quite simple.
Each moving stage acts as a closed loop, but the linkage involves the two stages before it. For example, the cable (belt, chain, etc.) would be anchored to stage 3, run over pulleys at each end of stage 2, and be anchored to stage 1. The stage 2 cable would be anchored to stage 2, run over pulleys on stage 1, and be anchored to the non-moving chassis/frame. The stage 1 cable would be anchored on stage 1, run over pulleys on the chassis/frame, and be anchored/attached to the drive drum. The ends of each cable terminate at one anchor point which includes the tensioning adjustment. The other anchor point for each cable is normally a clamp restraint on a continuous section of the cable. When loosened, it allows for adjustment of the location of that stage relative to the other stages. It doesn't matter which of the stages the different anchor points are on.

We have used both methods (continuous and cascading). Both work fine if done well, and both stink if done poorly. My advice is to use a design that allows for easy access to cable tension adjustment and replacement, and make it so that the cable cannot come off the pulleys when tension is lost.
__________________
NC Gears (Newaygo County Geeks Engineering Awesome Robotic Solutions)

FRC 1918 (Competing at St. Joseph and West MI in 2017)
FTC 6043 & 7911

Last edited by Wayne TenBrink : 14-12-2012 at 13:09.
  #20   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 14-12-2012, 14:01
jspatz1's Avatar
jspatz1 jspatz1 is offline
Registered User
AKA: Jeff
FRC #1986 (Team Titanium)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: Lee's Summit, MO
Posts: 835
jspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond reputejspatz1 has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to jspatz1
Re: Elevators: Cascaded vs Continuous

Now I get it. Clever. Gets rather complex with double the cables/belts and pulleys, but it would work. I would probably still choose the 2X take-up reel, it is easy to do and greatly simplifies the rigging.
__________________
  #21   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 14-12-2012, 19:17
EricH's Avatar
EricH EricH is offline
New year, new team
FRC #1197 (Torbots)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 19,803
EricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Elevators: Cascaded vs Continuous

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne TenBrink View Post
Each moving stage acts as a closed loop, but the linkage involves the two stages before it. For example, the cable (belt, chain, etc.) would be anchored to stage 3, run over pulleys at each end of stage 2, and be anchored to stage 1. The stage 2 cable would be anchored to stage 2, run over pulleys on stage 1, and be anchored to the non-moving chassis/frame. The stage 1 cable would be anchored on stage 1, run over pulleys on the chassis/frame, and be anchored/attached to the drive drum. The ends of each cable terminate at one anchor point which includes the tensioning adjustment. The other anchor point for each cable is normally a clamp restraint on a continuous section of the cable. When loosened, it allows for adjustment of the location of that stage relative to the other stages. It doesn't matter which of the stages the different anchor points are on.
330 did that for multiple years (1999, 2000, 2001, 2004, with a single-stage moving piece in 2002). No variation in drum diameter between up and down cables; the return cable simply attached at the top and fed back to the drum. The main issues with those lifts (all blue, all cable-driven) were when cable needed restringing--break out the aircraft cable crimpers and sneak them in somehow to make the crimp. I can't recall tensioners being used at all.

The other issue I can recall was a direct result of two FPs trying to drive the lift down past its hard stop in 2004. I think we were able to bend the C-channel back to normal; I do know that it held up through the rest of the regional and the Championship and offseasons, and if we powered it today it'd probably still function.
__________________
Past teams:
2003-2007: FRC0330 BeachBots
2008: FRC1135 Shmoebotics
2012: FRC4046 Schroedinger's Dragons

"Rockets are tricky..."--Elon Musk

Closed Thread


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 17:13.

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