Hopefully this year's drive train will be better.

[Validius]

For a small team like ours the pre made drivetrain was essential. It was solid and effective. There was only one problem: It was too fast. I called around for alrernate sprockets for the chain and quickly found that the kit ones were of a custom design and there was no way i could aquire any without making them myself.

Sure i could slow the bot down in software but that would sacrafice torque and would require a nasty algorithm so i could still output the necessary horsepower when steering.

I would *really* like to see this year's drivetrain use more standard parts.

[Tristan Lall]

Originally Posted by Validius

For a small team like ours the pre made drivetrain was essential. It was solid and effective. There was only one problem: It was too fast. I called around for alrernate sprockets for the chain and quickly found that the kit ones were of a custom design and there was no way i could aquire any without making them myself.

Sure i could slow the bot down in software but that would sacrafice torque and would require a nasty algorithm so i could still output the necessary horsepower when steering.

I would *really* like to see this year's drivetrain use more standard parts.

Why not use a larger sprocket on the wheel itself? (Or did you have a clearance issue with the outside diameter?) Other options include adding a second shaft with a large sprocket (for a large ratio) somewhere out of the way, and then chaining that to your wheels with a separate length of chain. In any event, the kit sprockets have a standard #35 ANSI power transmission chain tooth form; it's only the bore that is custom.

[Matt Krass]

Also the new AM Gearbox may provide an excellent alternative next season.

[Greg Needel]

why don't you just use smaller wheels? for each revolution your bot travels the distance equal to the circumference of the wheel. so the smaller the wheel the slower you go.

10 in wheel spinning at 100 rpm = (pi*10)*100(1min/60sec)(1foot/12 inches)
=4.3 ft/sec


5 in wheel spinning at 100 rpm = (pi*5)*100(1min/60sec)(1foot/12 inches)
=2.18 ft/sec

[KenWittlief]

isnt the bore sized to fit the shaft on the motor?

if they used standard sized sprockets with a standard bore, then how will you attach it to the motor?!

[JVN]

Originally Posted by Validius

...there was no way i could aquire any without making them myself.

I would *really* like to see this year's drivetrain use more standard parts.

For all those who offerred Mark help regearing the Kitbot, you should re-read the initial post.
I don't think that's what he came here for.
(kudos though, for 3 really good solutions).

Now, time for an intervention:
Mark,
It is okay for you to dislike the speed of the given kit drivetrain.
It is designed to be a good medium-fast speed, but it may not suit the needs of your team. You can't please everyone, all of the time.

It is okay for you to dislike the 16mm Metric output shaft with 5mm keyway.
This was implemented for a reason, which may not be obvious to everyone.

It is okay for you to hope FIRST will provide a solution with "standard parts".
A 1/2" Shaft with a 1/8" Keyway would be much easier, wouldn't it?

However, it is NOT okay for you to simply give up on solving the problem, and wait for a solution to be handed to you. There are MANY ways to re-gear the FRC kitbot, and change it's speed. For you to come here and say something along the like "there was no way i could aquire any without making them myself." is highly disappointing and frustrating to me.

It just seems like you gave up, and now you're going to sit and wait for a solution to fall into your lap.

This is not what FIRST is about. This is not what engineering is about, and this is the kind of thing that makes people think the Kitbot should NOT be provided in the kit.

Maybe you're supposed to "make them yourself".
Maybe you're supposed to want to improve the given drivetrain.
Maybe FIRST WANTS you to strive for something greater than what is provided; and maybe they WANT it to be a challenge.

Let's see... for 2006:
Paul Copioli designs a 2 speed, coaxial swerve drive for the KOP.
Would people complain that there aren't 4 speeds?
Would people complain that the included CIM motors, don't have built-in cooling fans, and the rules don't allow them?
Would people complain that it is too heavy, and he should lighten the design?
Would people complain that he didn't include a mechanism to play the game?
Would people complain that he didn't include the software necessary to make it move?

If he answered ALL these complaints (Paul is a talented guy, I bet he could come up with something. )
What would be the fun in that?

Back to your sprocket/shaft issue:
Man up, and figure out a way to fix the (perceived) problem.
If you need help, ask for it. There are many people here who are more than willing to guide you through the process of solving this problem.

Maybe FIRST will provide something "better" for 2006. Maybe they won't.
One thing is certain... whatever they provide... you have the right to make something better.

I don't mean any disrespect, I'm just alarmed by the tone of your post. This is the kind of philisophical issue that scares me.

Engineering is Problem Solving.
-JV

[sanddrag]

Originally Posted by JVN

However, it is NOT okay for you to simply give up on solving the problem, and wait for a solution to be handed to you. There are MANY ways to re-gear the FRC kitbot, and change it's speed. For you to come here and say something along the like "there was no way i could aquire any without making them myself." is highly disappointing and frustrating to me.

It just seems like you gave up, and now you're going to sit and wait for a solution to fall into your lap.

This is not what FIRST is about. This is not what engineering is about, and this is the kind of thing that makes people think the Kitbot should NOT be provided in the kit.

Maybe you're supposed to "make them yourself".
Maybe you're supposed to want to improve the given drivetrain.
Maybe FIRST WANTS you to strive for something greater than what is provided; and maybe they WANT it to be a challenge.

Very well said. I couldn't agree more. In 2005 it was easier than EVER before to build a very competitive robot for the game. But we still need it to be even easier than that? No way. It is supposed to be difficult, it is supposed to be challenging, and you are supposed to go beyond just what the instructions tell you. Back in the day, we had no gearboxes, we had no frame, heck, we had no CIM motors. If utilizing the kit gearbox is a challenge for you, I think something is wrong. Go back even just a few years and see what the kit gave you, and then you'll see that you've really "got it made" now.

[Tristan Lall]

Originally Posted by JVN

For all those who offerred Mark help regearing the Kitbot, you should re-read the initial post.
I don't think that's what he came here for.
(kudos though, for 3 really good solutions).

Ah, I see what you mean. He wants a smaller sprocket on the gearbox itself, rather than changing other portions of the drivetrain. I assumed that he wanted to work around the problem of non-standard sprockets, rather than find or make another non-standard one.

Originally Posted by JVN

It is okay for you to dislike the 16mm Metric output shaft with 5mm keyway.
This was implemented for a reason, which may not be obvious to everyone.

It is okay for you to hope FIRST will provide a solution with "standard parts".
A 1/2" Shaft with a 1/8" Keyway would be much easier, wouldn't it?

By the way, what was the reason? I can think of several, but I don't know which it was (e.g. "to make it challenging", "to make it metric", "because we had a pile of it lying around", etc.).

[Bill Gold]

Originally Posted by sanddrag

Very well said. I couldn't agree more. In 2005 it was easier than EVER before to build a very competitive robot for the game. But we still need it to be even easier than that? No way. It is supposed to be difficult, it is supposed to be challenging, and you are supposed to go beyond just what the instructions tell you. Back in the day, we had no gearboxes, we had no frame, heck, we had no CIM motors. If utilizing the kit gearbox is a challenge for you, I think something is wrong. Go back even just a few years and see what the kit gave you, and then you'll see that you've really "got it made" now.

Sorry about following you off topic on this thought again, but I think this needs to be said.

FIRST is difficult and it is challenging, but you aren’t necessarily required to go off and build an 8 motor drivetrain and 4 motor / 8 pneumatic piston arm mechanism for the heck of it when a 2 motor non-shifting drivetrain and 2 motor arm does just as good a job. IMHO being competitive in FIRST accomplished by doing the job as simply as possible while attempting (not necessarily succeeding) to do it as gracefully as possible. Why use all 12+ motors on something that can be done with 4 or 6? 254’s 2005 robot had a 4-motor shifting drive system that was pretty simple and a 2 motor - 2 joint arm. Simple and effective; and we even ran about 1/3 of our total matches with just 2 motors powered in our drivetrain.

What I’m trying to say is that you should not necessarily be looking to build the next “cool” thing, unless that’s your team’s goal and you’ve got the resources to finish it by ship date. If you’re worried about your resources, or don’t want to have to use them if you don’t have to then using premade components like those of AM or the KoP is a great option. Don’t fall into the trap of thinking that all the “upper echelon” teams custom machine absolutely every part of their robot (you could see a few cute AM stickers on parts of our 2005 robot, and we got the complimentary bag of zip-ties from Andy Baker at The Championship to prove it, too). IMHO the teams who have the best chance at success are the ones who know where they can save time and money on machining by using or using part of some premade equivalent.

-The Bill

[Conor Ryan]

improvement? We're already getting WAY more than we used to, try being on a rookie team 2 years ago, the only transmission you got was the transmission you get on a Bosch Hand Drill. Then you'd also get a right angle drive system too, personally I think we are lucky enough with what we got. And its not that hard find a way to make the output shaft fit the speed that you want. There should some challenge and FRC shouldn't be too simple. And for the mis-match units, I think they were trying to make it as cheap as possible, I don't want to be paying more than $2,000 for a kit with standard units, if its cheaper using 2 different units, go ahead I'm sure I'll be fine

The kit transmission met its goal this year, get as many teams as possible to be able to have a driving robot. Plus, how many teams did you see actually moving this year? Compare that to years past, you'll see a major improvement.

check www.andymark.biz out too they got several options for what you can use to as a pre-fabricated solution.

[lukevanoort]

Yeah, I'm going to agree with the previous comments. The '05 KoP is excellent. All we did was convert ours to 4wd with the same kit sprocket, and add different wheels and wheel sprockets. We left four CIMs in the drivetrain and had one of the most powerful non tread robots. And, unlike previous years there was no "death rattle" from the transmissions or motor fondue. Sure a shift-on-the-fly fourspeed kiwi drive rocks, but if we got that in the KoP, what would people like Andy Baker have to do? Look, 587 has never shifted, nor done anything fancy. We're a sixth year team. Also, we won the 2003 VCU GM award with drills at right angles and bigger pneumatic wheels. The only problem I have with the KoP is its mass, but it is a very solid chassis and gearbox.

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by Tristan Lall

By the way, what was the reason? I can think of several, but I don't know which it was (e.g. "to make it challenging", "to make it metric", "because we had a pile of it lying around", etc.).

I recall hearing on FIRSTcast that Paul Copioli used metric because that's what he uses in his line of work.

(And that is a heck of a transmission, too. Took everything we could throw at it.)

[lukevanoort]

Here is an example of more being thrown at it. Still, it's pretty stout.

[Andrew Blair]

Originally Posted by Billfred

(And that is a heck of a transmission, too. Took everything we could throw at it.)

Except for the spring retainers. Maybe we're dumb, but we jammed two kit boxes with those stupid retainers...
Other than that I must concur. An amazing kit, and really great overall. Helped us alot.

[Nitroxextreme]

the KOP of 2005 helped out many teams...my team included

for the smaller teams having a gearbox that they can learn from and improve on through different wheel sizes was really a great idea

also when the teams that would not have used a gearbox and now do...that just makes the game more competitive