|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#18
|
||||
|
||||
|
Tytus,
What benefit do you get from putting your swerve module on some suspension? It seems like a significant amount of added complexity/weight/space for very little gain. These kind of considerations are things you should think about while designing. What will I get out of this? What is it going to cost me? Is it worth it? Based on the historical FIRST games, I don't see any pressing need for a suspension system on a robot. Maybe if we went to a really rough/bumpy field.... but otherwise... you'd be better off spending the weight on the "ball mechanism" on top of the robot. It still looks cool. A "coax swerve" is something I've been playing with for a while now. It gives you the option to use a CVT/Shifting Swerve drive. If you are interested, check out team 998's bot from 2003. They had a working version of this. Keep designing, keep thinking of new ideas, and good luck. John |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| pic: Coaxial Lego doubble-wishbone crab | CD47-Bot | Robot Showcase | 7 | 10-12-2003 12:10 |
| pic: Crab Concept 6 | CD47-Bot | Extra Discussion | 13 | 14-11-2003 22:03 |
| pic: Tytus Coax Crab Fender | CD47-Bot | Extra Discussion | 9 | 28-09-2003 00:17 |
| pic: Tytus Crab Drive lego model | CD47-Bot | Extra Discussion | 11 | 08-09-2003 18:36 |
| pic: 217 Gen 2 Crab Module Section view | CD47-Bot | Robot Showcase | 2 | 28-04-2003 18:26 |