RIP Banebot RS550

[R.C.]

Originally Posted by evand4567

They're still selling the gearboxes, it just sounds like the rs550 has been discontinued due to them not making it in-house.

I doubt they made the motor in house... it's most likely a motor bought from a misc Chinese vendor.

[Michael Hill]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

I'm pretty sure they were knockoff (lower quality) mabuchis.

Possibly. My thoughts are 100% based on the picture of the motor on FIRST Choice. I don't have one handy. However, it's based on the assumption that 1) it's a picture of the actual motor, and 2) Banebots isn't buying knockoff parts that are marked the same way.

http://firstchoicebyandymark.com/fc15-124

[mman1506]

Originally Posted by Michael Hill

Possibly. My thoughts are 100% based on the picture of the motor on FIRST Choice. I don't have one handy. However, it's based on the assumption that 1) it's a picture of the actual motor, and 2) Banebots isn't buying knockoff parts that are marked the same way.

http://firstchoicebyandymark.com/fc15-124

There doesn't seem to be any machubi specific markings. The RS-550 motor is very common in battery powered tools and is made by tons of manufacturers. I wouldn't call RS-550's made by other manufactures "knock offs".

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by nathannfm

(I have also heard people say they like the AM-9015 better than the BB-rs550)

??

[Lil' Lavery]

Not a big loss. It's not as if there aren't other 500 series options. I prefer the AM-9015 to the BB550.

[Michael Hill]

Originally Posted by mman1506

There doesn't seem to be any machubi specific markings. The RS-550 motor is very common in battery powered tools and is made by tons of manufacturers. I wouldn't call RS-550's made by other manufactures "knock offs".

I'm referring to the RS550VC-7525 part number. The only places I see using that number is Mabuchi and knockoffs on alibaba.

[billbo911]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Not a big loss. It's not as if there aren't other 500 series options. I prefer the AM-9015 to the BB550.

Sean, I respect your opinion, but for the sake of those that may not know why you prefer the AM-9015, can you please explain why?
Explanations of why make learning much easier and more complete than just knowing "Sean Lavery prefers them."

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by billbo911

Sean, I respect your opinion, but for the sake of those that may not know why you prefer the AM-9015, can you please explain why?
Explanations of why make learning much easier and more complete than just knowing "Sean Lavery prefers them."

With the very loose motor restrictions now, hunting for the most power out of motors is less important than it used to be (plus the old FP beat the 550s in that regard, anyway). So even though the 550s have more total power than the 9015s, we opt for the 9015s for a few reasons.

For high torque applications, we gravitate towards the CIM family of motors. Thus the higher stall torque on the 550s over the 9015s doesn't really come into play.

We'd consider the fan cooled 500 series motors for high speed, low torque applications. However, I have yet to find an application that actually needs anywhere close to the ~19000rpm free speed of the 550. The ~16000rpm free speed of the 9015 will typically let us to get the desired speed for our application using less reduction.

Last, but certainly not least, we trust AndyMark products and customer support a lot more than we trust BaneBots products and customer support. While the 540/550 family never had the issues of the 775s or other BaneBots products, we usually try to shy away from risk that could cost us a match.

[jman4747]

I would say I'll miss the power/size ratio from a 550 and a BB planetary. By wattage it was second only to the CIM and 550's aren't especially fragile in my experience. Even with the addition of the mini-CIM the size and weight of a 550 with planetary sill beats it in several applications.

[Tom Line]

The lack of thermal mass and the speed at which they burn or have led us to move almost exclusively to cims and bags.

[protoserge]

Originally Posted by Tom Line

The lack of thermal mass and the speed at which they burn or have led us to move almost exclusively to cims and bags.

I'm curious if you allowed for proper air intake in your gearbox design? That was a leading cause of failure I found a few years ago. Some of the gearboxes for the RS775 and RS550 actually blocked the intake and required some machining of air slots.

[Tom Line]

Originally Posted by stinglikeabee

I'm curious if you allowed for proper air intake in your gearbox design? That was a leading cause of failure I found a few years ago. Some of the gearboxes for the RS775 and RS550 actually blocked the intake and required some machining of air slots.

Yep. But 550s will fry after only a couple seconds at stall. Up until this past year with current monitoring we had no easy way to monitor them. When one Loss is the difference between 1st and tenth, it's just nice to know an accidental stall won't cost a match.

[Pretzel]

Having used (and abused) the RS550 this year in our claw, we finally switched to a BAG motor at championships simply due to the fact that we had burned 5 of them at that point. When we used the closing of the claw to help reorient fallen bins into the preferred orientation (bottom of the bin pointing at the robot) it would demand too much from the RS550 and the motor would burn. A larger gear reduction wasn't an option since the claw still had to open promptly during the automated stacking and our drop off sequence, and making sure to line the robot up perfectly to the bin just wasted time. Switching to the BAG we found more power to close the claw and a larger margin for error on how long the claw operator could stall the motor to grip a bin that had slid out to the tips of the claw (which would prevent the claw from being able to cam over and lock shut).

I liked the RS550 for things like the shooter flywheel on our 2012 robot or the conveyor belt running through this year's robot, but for applications that can put a decent sustained load on the motor it was less than desirable.

[Nathan Streeter]

I'll be missing the RS550s quite a lot... they had plenty of power at a low weight. Our team has used them quite generously (this year's robot with only 6 motors, all CIMs, being an exception).

Our ideal use for them was on our 2013 FCS. 2 RS550s in a CIM-u-LATOR had all the power and torque we wanted, at a very low weight (less than a MiniCIM)... it was fabulous.

[Monochron]

I may be missing something, it seems like the majority of people in here don't really mind if these aren't available. They have one of the highest power ratings for their size and weight (higher max power than either the Bag OR the MiniCIM, and higher than any of the AndyMark 9015s), at least according to the specs I gathered. I have been a little hesitant to use them for high torque applications if stalling was going to be standard, but they are one of two or three small form factor motors legal in FRC.

We got into a situation this year where it appeared that the simplest way to increase performance of our elevator was to replace a Bag with a 550 because the size was similar. I guess that won't be an option anymore.