pic: 971 Friction Clutch Transmission Insides

[T^2]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

This is half my opinion and half my recollection of conversations with Austin, so please don't hold Austin accountable for my statements.

They had a clear problem they wanted to solve. An effectively utilized autoshift function with properly picked low/high ratios could potentially shave seconds off each match (4-10 maybe?). This time saved isn't huge, but could amount to a 5-15% increase in scoring each season.

Both the dog and ball shifter do not shift instantly, and neither does this clutch method.However the clutch method does shift faster than the previous two, and with a smoother engagement; this better blends with their goal of smooth autoshifting.

You can debate whether or not their overall goal is valid or cost effective, but please don't say that it's a solution in search of a problem. Valid analysis and engineering went into this, and it wasn't created for the sake of coolness.

I can see why taking seconds off of operation time would be helpful, and I concede that I shouldn't judge the necessity of this mechanism without knowing the design process behind it.

I wonder, though, if time wouldn't be better spent on low-hanging fruit -- some mentors and I made a lively discussion of this a few months ago when talking about how 1678 could improve our competitiveness. I know 971's bots always have high score ceilings, but often fail to execute to full potential. Would not it be more efficient to ensure basic functionality in each match, as opposed to some fantastic and some mediocre matches, rather than build a smoother autoshifter? (This isn't to say that both of these improvements couldn't happen simultaneously, of course.)

Perhaps someone from 971 could chime in here.

Originally Posted by Brandon Holley

Also keep in mind that you do not necessarily need to optimize-for-efficiency every single action your team takes.

My mistake. I usually take just this approach.

[Michael Corsetto]

Originally Posted by T^2

I can see why taking seconds off of operation time would be helpful, and I concede that I shouldn't judge the necessity of this mechanism without knowing the design process behind it.

I wonder, though, if time wouldn't be better spent on low-hanging fruit -- some mentors and I made a lively discussion of this a few months ago when talking about how 1678 could improve our competitiveness. I know 971's bots always have high score ceilings, but often fail to execute to full potential. Would not it be more efficient to ensure basic functionality in each match, as opposed to some fantastic and some mediocre matches, rather than build a smoother autoshifter? (This isn't to say that both of these improvements couldn't happen simultaneously, of course.)

Perhaps someone from 971 could chime in here.

I'm not on 971 (actually on your team T^2 ), but you can't make these assumptions without any understanding of team structure, goals, etc. I just spent the last 5 hours at 971's shop, I can assure you that developing a friction clutch transmission is certainly NOT the only thing 971 is doing this off-season. Arguably, they've made larger strides this fall than we have.

You know what happens when you assume...

-Mike

[Nuttyman54]

Originally Posted by T^2

I wonder, though, if time wouldn't be better spent on low-hanging fruit -- some mentors and I made a lively discussion of this a few months ago when talking about how 1678 could improve our competitiveness. I know 971's bots always have high score ceilings, but often fail to execute to full potential. Would not it be more efficient to ensure basic functionality in each match, as opposed to some fantastic and some mediocre matches, rather than build a smoother autoshifter? (This isn't to say that both of these improvements couldn't happen simultaneously, of course.)

Perhaps someone from 971 could chime in here.

We are working on that too, but a lot of that is very game specific, so it's hard to address with specific projects in the off-season. We've had a very detailed discussion of the robot issues last year and how to avoid them again. I will also say that there has been a conscious choice during build to go for riskier designs with higher potential the past few seasons.

This was one of several off-season projects, one of the others being a 3rd robot, HP-load only for Ultimate Ascent that we ran at Madtown. That was designed and built almost entirely by freshman and sophomores, with some help from the upperclassmen. The friction clutch is a lot cooler, and I don't know of anyone else in FRC who has tried to make one as a replacement for the dog shifter, so we thought it would be more interesting to CD.

[T^2]

Originally Posted by Nuttyman54

we thought it would be more interesting to CD.

It is. Could we get a picture of both halves assembled together?

[Travis Schuh]

Originally Posted by T^2

It is. Could we get a picture of both halves assembled together?

Try http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/39233?

This is the closest we have of what you are asking. You can see the large gear and steel drum that is in this picture, and then the opposing steel drum and smaller gear. Unfortunately all of the inner workings get hidden once you assemble it.

-Travis

[Michael Hill]

Pretty cool, I've been thinking about how to implement a clutch transmission for a few months now. Pretty awesome to see. Nice job!