Go to Post Announcers don't keep the score. They are fairly outgoing people, make witty remarks, and wear goofy shirts. We can't take them too seriously. :) - Andy Baker [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > ChiefDelphi.com Website > Extra Discussion
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 16-09-2015, 03:24
Bryce2471's Avatar
Bryce2471 Bryce2471 is offline
Alumnus
AKA: Bryce Croucher
FRC #2471 (Team Mean Machine)
Team Role: Mechanical
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: Camas, WA
Posts: 424
Bryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud of
Re: pic: WCD 3 CIM PTO Ball Shifter Render

Quote:
Originally Posted by asid61 View Post
Very nice. PTO/shifter for 2.2lbs is really good.
Is there any way to change the gearing to get a free speed under 18fps? Going above 20fps free speeds seems sketchy with 4 cims.
The slowest the gearbox can be configured without significant plate changes is 7.1 ft/s in low and 17.9 ft/s in high (80% of free speed)
Quote:
Originally Posted by asid61 View Post
I continue to amaze myself with my idiocy. Whoops.
Thank you.
In any case, you can't accelerate with 6 cims to above 20fps with the roboRIO anyway without a brownout, especially a low voltage, so is it possible to reduce the gearing for that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeeTwo View Post
Yes, the gearbox shifts, ball shifters based on the subject line, though the mechanism isn't stated. Low gear is around 7:1 (see first post), so with three CIMs per side, you can easily get up to enough speed for the shift, which can then take you to 20 fps.

Given the voltage brownout levels, I now expect that PTOs are much less useful than they may have been in the past. The first roboRIO year with bumpers, defense, or crazy acceleration requirements will likely be the proof/disproof on this point. The bottim line is that the additional weight for shifting may completely override the weight for separate motors, especially for lower-resource teams.
Quote:
Originally Posted by R.C. View Post
I'm unsure how PTO's are less useful, as they just power another system. I would say 3 CIM drives will be less useful with the brownouts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asid61 View Post
I'm aware that it shifts, however, the acceleration/current may still be too high for safety even if you start from low gear. Probably need to test that to be sure, because I have no idea, honestly. You'd also need to implement autoshifting for that to work.
The weight cost is on the order of a pound or two for a PTO if you go with the WCP PTO (plus whatever you're using for integration into the system). The alternative for endgame mechanisms is to use discrete motors or pneumatics, both of which usually cost more weight for similar outputs although they are easier and faster to integrate. Of course, the last endgame was in 2013, so maybe they're gone for good (and with them most of the use of PTOs).
This is all interesting conversation, and thank you all for your replies. However, it would be particularly useful if someone could post a personal testament to how the roboRio responds to having a 6 CIM drive train. This way I could walk the new CAD student through the process of reevaluating the gear ratios with some real evidence. Unless that happens, this project will continue to be a test of the new control system's outer limits, as it was originally intended to be.
Hopefully with this gearbox, we will be know what is too fast, so that when next season comes we will be able to pick appropriate speeds.
__________________
FLL Team Future imagineers
2010 Oregon State Championships: Winners
2011 International Invite: First place Robot design, Second Place Robot Performance
FRC Team Mean Machine
2012 Seattle: Winning alliance
2013 Portland: Winning alliance
2013 Spokane: Winning alliance
2014 Wilsonville: Winning alliance
2014 Worlds: Deans List Winner
Reply With Quote
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 16-09-2015, 08:35
Knufire Knufire is offline
Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
no team
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: Terre Haute, IN
Posts: 740
Knufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond repute
Re: pic: WCD 3 CIM PTO Ball Shifter Render

Instead of anecdotal evidence, how about some objective data?

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/3067
__________________
Team 469: 2010 - 2013
Team 5188: 2014 - 2016
NAR (VEX U): 2014 - Present
Reply With Quote
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 16-09-2015, 15:39
Bryce2471's Avatar
Bryce2471 Bryce2471 is offline
Alumnus
AKA: Bryce Croucher
FRC #2471 (Team Mean Machine)
Team Role: Mechanical
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: Camas, WA
Posts: 424
Bryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud of
Re: pic: WCD 3 CIM PTO Ball Shifter Render

Quote:
Originally Posted by Knufire View Post
Instead of anecdotal evidence, how about some objective data?

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/3067
Thank you for posting that. I don't know how I missed it.

The data presented in cyber blue's testing papers is concerning in some ways, but not in others. For instance, it is concerning that their test platform that is geared for 11 ft/s dropped it's voltage so close to the brownout point, but their testing also shows me that this gearbox will probable not have trouble with tripping the breaker, or causing a brownout while in low gear.

From the thread you just linked:
Quote:
We only did this specific test with the 4 CIM configuration because with 6 CIMs or 4+2 we just spun the wheels.
__________________
FLL Team Future imagineers
2010 Oregon State Championships: Winners
2011 International Invite: First place Robot design, Second Place Robot Performance
FRC Team Mean Machine
2012 Seattle: Winning alliance
2013 Portland: Winning alliance
2013 Spokane: Winning alliance
2014 Wilsonville: Winning alliance
2014 Worlds: Deans List Winner
Reply With Quote
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 16-09-2015, 16:55
Chris is me's Avatar
Chris is me Chris is me is online now
no bag, vex only, final destination
AKA: Pinecone
FRC #0228 (GUS Robotics); FRC #2170 (Titanium Tomahawks)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Glastonbury, CT
Posts: 7,718
Chris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Chris is me
Re: pic: WCD 3 CIM PTO Ball Shifter Render

So back to the actual gearbox...

I think your CIMs aren't supported as well as they could be. It's pretty common in these kind of gearboxes to have a web that follows the diameter of the CIM in order to support the whole face. Right now the little sliver of metal supporting the middle of the CIM may not be substantial / rigid enough. The tiny amount of weight savings isn't really worth risking flex in that area of the gearbox.

If that is a stock ballshifter shaft, I would be concerned about direct driving a wheel off of that shaft. It might not be a good idea to load the shaft that way. The hex end of it is just pressed in to the end of the shifter shaft, with about 3/4" of engagement if memory serves. I think this is one reason the COTS direct drive ballshifters have a third gear stage. This does indeed make fitting a ballshifter into a WCD gearbox in 2 stages quite difficult.

I'm working on a similar gearbox for a similar application, and the constraint of using the ball shifter shaft without direct driving off of it is quite annoying. I don't know how feasible this is at all, but have you considered using it backwards? Having the CIMs drive a gear on the output of the shifter shaft, then putting two output gears on the wheel shaft? Might be worth a shot, particularly if you're into the latest WCD fad of hanging your drive motors over the wheels. Probably not a good idea, but something unique to look at.
__________________
Mentor / Drive Coach: 228 (2016-?)
...2016 Waterbury SFs (with 3314, 3719), RIDE #2 Seed / Winners (with 1058, 6153), Carver QFs (with 503, 359, 4607)
Mentor / Consultant Person: 2170 (2017-?)
---
College Mentor: 2791 (2010-2015)
...2015 TVR Motorola Quality, FLR GM Industrial Design
...2014 FLR Motorola Quality / SFs (with 341, 4930)
...2013 BAE Motorola Quality, WPI Regional #1 Seed / Delphi Excellence in Engineering / Finalists (with 20, 3182)
...2012 BAE Imagery / Finalists (with 1519, 885), CT Xerox Creativity / SFs (with 2168, 118)
Student: 1714 (2009) - 2009 Minnesota 10,000 Lakes Regional Winners (with 2826, 2470)
2791 Build Season Photo Gallery - Look here for mechanism photos My Robotics Blog (Updated April 11 2014)
Reply With Quote
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 16-09-2015, 17:20
Knufire Knufire is offline
Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
no team
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: Terre Haute, IN
Posts: 740
Knufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond repute
Re: pic: WCD 3 CIM PTO Ball Shifter Render

The newest rev of the ball shifter shaft has the hex pinned instead of pressed.
__________________
Team 469: 2010 - 2013
Team 5188: 2014 - 2016
NAR (VEX U): 2014 - Present
Reply With Quote
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 16-09-2015, 17:41
Aren_Hill's Avatar
Aren_Hill Aren_Hill is offline
Build Nifty Things
no team
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Menlo Park CA
Posts: 1,218
Aren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond repute
Re: pic: WCD 3 CIM PTO Ball Shifter Render

Quote:
Originally Posted by Knufire View Post
The newest rev of the ball shifter shaft has the hex pinned instead of pressed.
Pinned AND Pressed.

-Aren
__________________
A guy who likes robots.
1625->3928->148->1296->971 oh dear
Reply With Quote
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 16-09-2015, 18:25
Bryce2471's Avatar
Bryce2471 Bryce2471 is offline
Alumnus
AKA: Bryce Croucher
FRC #2471 (Team Mean Machine)
Team Role: Mechanical
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: Camas, WA
Posts: 424
Bryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud of
Re: pic: WCD 3 CIM PTO Ball Shifter Render

Quote:
Originally Posted by Knufire View Post
The newest rev of the ball shifter shaft has the hex pinned instead of pressed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aren_Hill View Post
Pinned AND Pressed.

-Aren
Thank you two for clarifying. However, I am not planning on using the vex shifter shaft.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris is me View Post
I think your CIMs aren't supported as well as they could be. It's pretty common in these kind of gearboxes to have a web that follows the diameter of the CIM in order to support the whole face. Right now the little sliver of metal supporting the middle of the CIM may not be substantial / rigid enough. The tiny amount of weight savings isn't really worth risking flex in that area of the gearbox.
Thank you bringing up the question of CIM support. I think your concern is stemming from the fact that there are several aspects of this gearbox that are not easily visible from this angle.
1. The CIM is resting against 0.25" Al along its entire bottom edge.
2. nestled in between the CIM motors are standoffs that run back to support the pneumatic cylinder that runs the PTO. These standoffs will also help support the CIM motor from below.
Quote:
If that is a stock ballshifter shaft, I would be concerned about direct driving a wheel off of that shaft. It might not be a good idea to load the shaft that way. The hex end of it is just pressed in to the end of the shifter shaft, with about 3/4" of engagement if memory serves. I think this is one reason the COTS direct drive ballshifters have a third gear stage. This does indeed make fitting a ballshifter into a WCD gearbox in 2 stages quite difficult.
For this reason, I have never been a fan of the design of the ball shifter shaft from vex. In this design there are two custom simplified one piece shifter shafts.
Quote:
I'm working on a similar gearbox for a similar application, and the constraint of using the ball shifter shaft without direct driving off of it is quite annoying. I don't know how feasible this is at all, but have you considered using it backwards? Having the CIMs drive a gear on the output of the shifter shaft, then putting two output gears on the wheel shaft? Might be worth a shot, particularly if you're into the latest WCD fad of hanging your drive motors over the wheels. Probably not a good idea, but something unique to look at.
This is a cool idea in my opinion, Even though it would cause a few problems. The only issues I see with it right now are that it would make gearbox assembly difficult, and cause there to be an unused gap in the gearbox unless the first stage was cantilevered.
__________________
FLL Team Future imagineers
2010 Oregon State Championships: Winners
2011 International Invite: First place Robot design, Second Place Robot Performance
FRC Team Mean Machine
2012 Seattle: Winning alliance
2013 Portland: Winning alliance
2013 Spokane: Winning alliance
2014 Wilsonville: Winning alliance
2014 Worlds: Deans List Winner
Reply With Quote
  #8   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 17-09-2015, 10:24
Chris is me's Avatar
Chris is me Chris is me is online now
no bag, vex only, final destination
AKA: Pinecone
FRC #0228 (GUS Robotics); FRC #2170 (Titanium Tomahawks)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Glastonbury, CT
Posts: 7,718
Chris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Chris is me
Re: pic: WCD 3 CIM PTO Ball Shifter Render

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryce2471 View Post
Thank you bringing up the question of CIM support. I think your concern is stemming from the fact that there are several aspects of this gearbox that are not easily visible from this angle.
1. The CIM is resting against 0.25" Al along its entire bottom edge.
2. nestled in between the CIM motors are standoffs that run back to support the pneumatic cylinder that runs the PTO. These standoffs will also help support the CIM motor from below.
These features should really help. You're probably okay since I don't think there are any weird loading conditions that would torque the CIMs away from the center of the gearbox. I'd probably leave the material on, but that's just me being overly cautious.

Quote:
For this reason, I have never been a fan of the design of the ball shifter shaft from vex. In this design there are two custom simplified one piece shifter shafts.
Any chance you could post a quick screenshot / view of one of these? I'd love to take a look. Might end up doing something similar if it isn't too difficult to make. Certainly easier than doing design gymnastics to make the COTS part work the way I want it to.

There's certainly nothing wrong with the Vex shaft design; it does what Vex is trying to accomplish and it works for their COTS product, but it definitely isn't tailored for WCD use.

Quote:
This is a cool idea in my opinion, Even though it would cause a few problems. The only issues I see with it right now are that it would make gearbox assembly difficult, and cause there to be an unused gap in the gearbox unless the first stage was cantilevered.
Yeah, the first stage would need to be cantilevered. The idea here being that the extra space taken up between the gears by the coupler isn't such a big deal if it's going through a plate in that area anyway.

I sketched this out last night and the biggest difficulty with it is clearance between the motors and the middle gears. You end up with a really big gearbox if you go 3 CIM unless you use idler gears (not necessarily out of the question).
__________________
Mentor / Drive Coach: 228 (2016-?)
...2016 Waterbury SFs (with 3314, 3719), RIDE #2 Seed / Winners (with 1058, 6153), Carver QFs (with 503, 359, 4607)
Mentor / Consultant Person: 2170 (2017-?)
---
College Mentor: 2791 (2010-2015)
...2015 TVR Motorola Quality, FLR GM Industrial Design
...2014 FLR Motorola Quality / SFs (with 341, 4930)
...2013 BAE Motorola Quality, WPI Regional #1 Seed / Delphi Excellence in Engineering / Finalists (with 20, 3182)
...2012 BAE Imagery / Finalists (with 1519, 885), CT Xerox Creativity / SFs (with 2168, 118)
Student: 1714 (2009) - 2009 Minnesota 10,000 Lakes Regional Winners (with 2826, 2470)
2791 Build Season Photo Gallery - Look here for mechanism photos My Robotics Blog (Updated April 11 2014)
Reply With Quote
  #9   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 17-09-2015, 16:54
Bryce2471's Avatar
Bryce2471 Bryce2471 is offline
Alumnus
AKA: Bryce Croucher
FRC #2471 (Team Mean Machine)
Team Role: Mechanical
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: Camas, WA
Posts: 424
Bryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud ofBryce2471 has much to be proud of
Re: pic: WCD 3 CIM PTO Ball Shifter Render

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris is me View Post
Any chance you could post a quick screenshot / view of one of these? I'd love to take a look. Might end up doing something similar if it isn't too difficult to make. Certainly easier than doing design gymnastics to make the COTS part work the way I want it to.
Yes. I'll probably just post another render with only the shifting components visible.
Quote:
There's certainly nothing wrong with the Vex shaft design; it does what Vex is trying to accomplish and it works for their COTS product, but it definitely isn't tailored for WCD.
Their shifter shaft definitely does the job they want it to, but I still think it could have been designed in a way that woud have made their gearbox more versatile and the shifting components more useful. The way they have it set up makes two stage drive systems impractical. Wheather it's in custom gearboxes or their COTS box.
Quote:
I sketched this out last night and the biggest difficulty with it is clearance between the motors and the middle gears. You end up with a really big gearbox if you go 3 CIM unless you use idler gears (not necessarily out of the question).
I agree with this, but another option you should consider is using belts in the first stage to relocate the CIMs. This would turn out similar to 192's gearbox, but you could possibly get the pneumatic cylinder out of the belly pan as well.
__________________
FLL Team Future imagineers
2010 Oregon State Championships: Winners
2011 International Invite: First place Robot design, Second Place Robot Performance
FRC Team Mean Machine
2012 Seattle: Winning alliance
2013 Portland: Winning alliance
2013 Spokane: Winning alliance
2014 Wilsonville: Winning alliance
2014 Worlds: Deans List Winner

Last edited by Bryce2471 : 17-09-2015 at 16:59.
Reply With Quote
  #10   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 16-09-2015, 23:32
Knufire Knufire is offline
Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
no team
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: Terre Haute, IN
Posts: 740
Knufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond reputeKnufire has a reputation beyond repute
Re: pic: WCD 3 CIM PTO Ball Shifter Render

Quote:
Originally Posted by Knufire View Post
Instead of anecdotal evidence, how about some objective data?

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/3067
Whoops, that was actually the wrong paper. Here's the complete testing they did: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/3071
__________________
Team 469: 2010 - 2013
Team 5188: 2014 - 2016
NAR (VEX U): 2014 - Present
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 23:30.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi