Vex Pro Ball Shifter Questions

[DonRotolo]

2. The neutral position is in-between high and low (full in and full out)

[R.C.]

What T^2 said above, for the neutral you can't easily get it with springs.

But FabCo and Bimba sell a 3 POS cylinder. The hole pattern matches with the current mounting and the cylinders are basically interchangeable with the SMC cylinder used on the ball lock. So you can easily get the neutral position.

-RC

[yash101]

If you can get a servo to act as the cylinder, you could accurately position the shifter stuff.
You may like checking this out: http://www.andymark.com/product-p/am-2297.htm

Something similar may be what you want!

[T^2]

Originally Posted by yash101

If you can get a servo to act as the cylinder, you could accurately position the shifter stuff.
You may like checking this out: http://www.andymark.com/product-p/am-2297.htm

Something similar may be what you want!

No team has accomplished this on the ballshifter as of yet; see 67's attempts last season. If you're going into this project blind, don't do this.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by T^2

No team has accomplished this on the ballshifter as of yet; see 67's attempts last season. If you're going into this project blind, don't do this.

I'll also note that with dog shifters, those folks that use servos tend to switch to pneumatics as soon as practical. The legal FRC servos tend not to have enough power to shift on the fly, or so I hear (and I've heard it from enough sources to figure there's some truth to it). No comment on the linear servo, though; I don't think anybody's tried it in a competition yet.

[Adam Freeman]

Originally Posted by yash101

If you can get a servo to act as the cylinder, you could accurately position the shifter stuff.
You may like checking this out: http://www.andymark.com/product-p/am-2297.htm

Something similar may be what you want!

Originally Posted by T^2

No team has accomplished this on the ballshifter as of yet; see 67's attempts last season. If you're going into this project blind, don't do this.

I have yet to try the linear servo shifter. It appears that something like that would solve the issues I was having with the other servos setups, trying to get the rotatary motion lined up with the "slop" in the shift rod.

[yash101]

With a linear servo setup, the problem is that you need to be at a complete stop to shift, which rids you of the point in having a shifter. You would typically use the shifters to accelerate quickly, and then accelerate slowly, to a higher max speed!

[EricH]

Originally Posted by yash101

With a linear servo setup, the problem is that you need to be at a complete stop to shift, which rids you of the point in having a shifter. You would typically use the shifters to accelerate quickly, and then accelerate slowly, to a higher max speed!

That's actually the problem with ANY servo setup, or so I hear. I think 330 tried servos on a shifter back when I was a student, but never on a competition robot; we used pneumatics on EVERY shifter we had (drill motor trannies and AM Gen2s).

[MichaelBick]

Originally Posted by yash101

With a linear servo setup, the problem is that you need to be at a complete stop to shift, which rids you of the point in having a shifter. You would typically use the shifters to accelerate quickly, and then accelerate slowly, to a higher max speed!

The only team that I know that had used shifter to accelerate more quickly is 33. Everybody else generally uses shifter so that they have a higher top speed and a good pushing gear.

[yash101]

Yeah, I guess, but if used properly, shifters can be used to accelerate to a moderate speed faster, and then increase the top speed! Geared down with speed reduction, you will get tons of torque, what you need to accelerate faster. Geared down high, you can increase the top speed by a lot!

[AlecS]

Originally Posted by yash101

Yeah, I guess, but if used properly, shifters can be used to accelerate to a moderate speed faster, and then increase the top speed! Geared down with speed reduction, you will get tons of torque, what you need to accelerate faster. Geared down high, you can increase the top speed by a lot!

A careful analysis of the factors at work in drivetrain will show that with typical FRC top speeds, this is not the case. Even in cases where battery voltage drop limits acceleration, the acceleration difference between a low gear 8fps and high gear 18fps, for the first 8fps is minimal. You would be talking about less than .3 - .1 seconds here, over a distance of 50 feet. Of course, gearing for absurdly high speeds, say 30fps, would yield a greater acceleration difference. However, at these speeds, you wouldn't even be able to accelerate to top speed in 50 ft, not to mention the currents you would be drawing.

When you consider the time and air it takes to shift each time, any small benefit gained would be a drop in the pond when driving in a match.

[MichaelBick]

This doesn't even start to mention the complexity of correctly writing auto shifting code. For the small benefit is it really worth all that time?

[sanddrag]

When I drove 3476's auto-shifting Vex pro ball shifter robot, it was rather seamless, and it seemed worth it.

[yash101]

Originally Posted by MichaelBick

This doesn't even start to mention the complexity of correctly writing auto shifting code. For the small benefit is it really worth all that time?

Couldn't you use PID, running inside the FPGA to: If encoders on the motor see that the motor is running at a high RPM, and the power is high, switch to high gear, to reduce the RPM. If the motor RPM is low, and the power is low, switch to low gear. That could possibly automatically shift for you. Otherwise, you could use an accelerometer! If nothing works, you could also just have a button on the operator console, like in our 2012 robot. (Supershifters were bad for it because they would flip the robot over )

[FrankJ]

PIDs aren't really useful here. Ball shifters are a discrete change. PID need a variable to control in small steps. Not just one big one.