|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: VersaFrame by Vex Robotics
Please do NOT read what I am about to say as a knock against VersaFrame, it is a fantastic product!
If, and this is the qualifier, you have the ability to drill a 1" hole pattern accurately and repeatably, you can buy the raw materials and make most of the frame pieces your self. This will save you some $$, but not much time. Now, when it comes to the gussets, I doubt you will be able to make the parts as easily, and accurately, and still save $$ and time. These gussets and mounts are a very quick and easy way to assembly your frames and structures. All that said, isn't the whole idea behind VersaFrame and Gussets that you do not need the ability to machine accurately to use them? If so, then I guess my comments are a bit unnecessary. So, just take them as food for thought. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: VersaFrame by Vex Robotics
I designed 256's entire 2014 robot utilizing the 2x1x.1 tubing and the 1x1x.04 tubing, and it was by far the most competitive robot we've built to date because we were able to finish faster than we normally did even with the late shipping accident from last year, and our robot was strong and reliable. Like Chris said, the .04" thick 1x1 is not suitable for any application that takes a lot of load. Luckily 256's design last year did not use any 1x1 under load (apart from bumper support, but they took that fine) and it all held up for us. The new .1" thick 1x1 should solve that. Also agreeing with Chris, I prefer drilling out to 3/16 and using 3/16 rivets. 5/32 rivets are great if you're using 10 of them per joint, but with the linear fashion of the gussets we had some 5/32 rivets shear on our shooter last year, so drilling to 3/16 is helpful (and pretty easy).
In regards to the gussets, for almost every application the .09" thick gusset is great, except in some very specific high load applications we had our gussets bend over like paper (<110 degree bend). This was the one piece that held on our shooter so understandably there'd be a lot of torque there, and the easy solution for us was to just double up on the amount of gussets. Like Bill said - the 1" hole pattern is pretty easy to replicate yourself if you have the resources and don't mind thicker tubing, and a lot cheaper. I like the .1" and .04" thick walls that you cannot get elsewhere, and the pre-drilled holes definitely saves you time. Having been on two teams on opposite sides of the resources spectrum, I've experienced the versachassis from both points of view. On 256, the versachassis enabled us to quickly and easily get a competitive robot put together with hand drills and saws. As a junior mentor on 1323, a team with a lot of resources, I've found out that the team uses the versachassis as well because of the time saved from not having to use our machines on fancy hole patterns and because of the thinner walls. Overall I really love the VersaChassis system designed by WCP and VEX. It is definitely not the end all be all solution for every team, but for those who can benefit from it*, it is a fantastic way to bring your team up to the next level or enable your already competitive team to do more and save time. *Disclaimer: I would not recommend this system for teams low on monetary resources or experience. Those teams are better suited for the kitbot because of its cheaper price and the manual that comes with it. I think the teams that will benefit the most from the system are: 1) Newer teams who have their stuff together and have a bit more money to spend than rookie teams but maybe not the machining capabilities of veteran teams, 2) Veteran teams who want to save time in the build season and use their machining resources for more important things, and 3) Veteran teams who have been around for a while but still may not have a lot of resources but do have experience and want to easily bring their game up to powerhouse level. |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: VersaFrame by Vex Robotics
As with all products, it's how you implement the product that matters.
We used 1"x1"x.04" for our frame in 2014, except for the two main rails running down the center of our chassis that was bearing the load of the catapult tubing. No issues, no bending, we could have parked a bus on it. The trick wasn't the tubing but how it was designed into the final product. We did utilize a single gusset plate for the entire chassis instead of using many Vex gussets which improved rigidity. We also used 1"x2" Vex VersaFrame for our catapult arm assembly. With this we used the Vex gussets and found that the aluminum rivets were loosening up. We switched from aluminum to steel rivets on the gussets where the most load was being applied and they stayed nice and tight for the rest of the season. Here's a link to a picture of the .04" wall chassis we used this year. http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...=pwnage+swerve |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: VersaFrame by Vex Robotics
FWIW, we usually get 27 feet of 1x1" thin wall tubing for $30-something ($40-something one year) when we buy it in bulk and pick it up from our supplier ourselves. Even small online orders are substantially less expensive than VersaFrame. To me, VersaFrame isn't economical if the team can handle appropriate drilling of holes themselves. I agree it is very quick when used with the VEX gussets - but at a price.
2x1" is a bit more worth it due to the ability to make a very quick, easy-to-connect-to, precise drive train in many cases - but again, plenty of teams are better of using their skills to cut into bulk 2x1" rather than the VersaFrame. Personally, my team may or may not have a welder this year, so we may use Versaframe due to the gussets. Not that VersaFrame is a bad deal under certain circumstances (valuation of time during FRC is hard...). However I think it's worth it to point out the tradeoffs in this type of thread. Last edited by JesseK : 18-12-2014 at 15:57. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|