pic: 6-sided tank drive

[evanperryg]

loading photo ...

[Arpan]

Not sure if the 1*1 stuff supporting the bumpers is vexpro versachassis stuff, but if so I'd double layer it or use thicker material. That stuff is really thin for a bumper frame.

[evand4567]

Originally Posted by Arpan

Not sure if the 1*1 stuff supporting the bumpers is vexpro versachassis stuff, but if so I'd double layer it or use thicker material. That stuff is really thin for a bumper frame.

If it's welded together with 1/8" walls, it shouldn't be a problem

[Arpan]

right; the 1*1 vexpro stock has much thinner walls. I'm not sure which it is.

[BBray_T1296]

Originally Posted by evanperryg

loading photo ...

If I may ask, why are your angles "149.07 degrees" and "105.46"? You will never ever need that kind of precision in a FRC situation, especially on a frame which will be bashed and smashed into every 6 seconds anyways.*

Even with a chopsaw/bandsaw/mill/cnc mill/whatever, it is certainly a better real world design if you round those off to some amount. How critically important is it that you are exactly perfect? In your robot's frame, just about never.

Also, just a recommendation, While it is less pretty, using 1/32" (or preferably 1/16" or 1/8") increments instead of decimals is much less of a hassle for whoever will measure the parts, and just a couple clicks in CAD

Not trying to be a wet blanket on this design, it certainly is cool, but it would be beneficial for every party involved if you simply rounded to the most convenient dimensions, where there will be an immeasurable difference in performance, but a significant improvement in both engineering design quality, and manufacturing


*after all, the entire point of a 6 sided drive like this is for the very purpose of escaping trapping t-bones"

[evanperryg]

Originally Posted by BBray_T1296

If I may ask, why are your angles "149.07 degrees" and "105.46"? You will never ever need that kind of precision in a FRC situation, especially on a frame which will be bashed and smashed into every 6 seconds anyways.*

Even with a chopsaw/bandsaw/mill/cnc mill/whatever, it is certainly a better real world design if you round those off to some amount. How critically important is it that you are exactly perfect? In your robot's frame, just about never.

Also, just a recommendation, While it is less pretty, using 1/32" (or preferably 1/16" or 1/8") increments instead of decimals is much less of a hassle for whoever will measure the parts, and just a couple clicks in CAD

Not trying to be a wet blanket on this design, it certainly is cool, but it would be beneficial for every party involved if you simply rounded to the most convenient dimensions, where there will be an immeasurable difference in performance, but a significant improvement in both engineering design quality, and manufacturing


*after all, the entire point of a 6 sided drive like this is for the very purpose of escaping trapping t-bones"

The weird angles are the result of the not-weird side lengths. The tolerance should be pretty high.
Oh, and it's welded 1/8" aluminum tubing

[Rosiebotboss]

Does it meet the 110" rule?

[g_sawchuk]

Question for you, how exactly is this useful? I love the design, it looks pretty fancy, but in the long run it will amount to more work and not be worth it if doesn't have any specific benefits compared to a 4-sided tank drive.

[cxcad]

Originally Posted by GrifBot

Question for you, how exactly is this useful? I love the design, it looks pretty fancy, but in the long run it will amount to more work and not be worth it if doesn't have any specific benefits compared to a 4-sided tank drive.

This design is helpful for avoiding t-bone pins and defense in general. Also hexagons have a greater area to perimeter ratio.

[BBray_T1296]

Originally Posted by cxcad

This design is helpful for avoiding t-bone pins and defense in general. Also hexagons have a greater area to perimeter ratio.

If you are going to forgo the square, a hexagon is really the best option for a traditional tank drive. For things like holonomic and 3 wheeled swerve, other n-gons may be appropriate.

Circles are mathematically the optimal perimeter-to-area figures, but would be difficult to make, and a nightmare to put bumpers on.

[AdamHeard]

You can more efficiently optimize the use of the perimeter sizing by moving the front/rear wheels to inside the frame, and making the center wheel wider.

[g_sawchuk]

Originally Posted by cxcad

This design is helpful for avoiding t-bone pins and defense in general. Also hexagons have a greater area to perimeter ratio.

Ah, good point, although T-Bone pins are rather rare. However, would the bot be able to play an effective defense? For example, if the objective was to T-Bone a bot of the other alliance, it would require rather exact precision as to hit the bot right in the middle of their side.

[BBray_T1296]

Originally Posted by GrifBot

Ah, good point, although T-Bone pins are rather rare.

I saw them happen quite a bit this season. Robots waiting for the ball from a human player after a truss were prime candidates for being bulldozed back to the inbound station

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by GrifBot

Ah, good point, although T-Bone pins are rather rare. However, would the bot be able to play an effective defense? For example, if the objective was to T-Bone a bot of the other alliance, it would require rather exact precision as to hit the bot right in the middle of their side.

Not necessarily, if they are hit square to an angled face, at least the drivetrain is not perpindular to the t-boning robot.

T-bones happen a LOT at the high level of play in certain games.

[g_sawchuk]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

Not necessarily, if they are hit square to an angled face, at least the drivetrain is not perpindular to the t-boning robot.

T-bones happen a LOT at the high level of play in certain games.

Fair enough. It is true that they happened this season a lot, but this was due to the lack of mobility some robots had as they waited for the ball from the human player. On a good driver, t-bones tend not to be effective as a good driver will stay in motion as much as possible.