Go to Post GP is best shown and lived and not talked about. - Steve W [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Technical > Motors
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Closed Thread
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-01-2007, 20:38
sanddrag sanddrag is offline
On to my 16th year in FRC
FRC #0696 (Circuit Breakers)
Team Role: Teacher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Glendale, CA
Posts: 8,519
sanddrag has a reputation beyond reputesanddrag has a reputation beyond reputesanddrag has a reputation beyond reputesanddrag has a reputation beyond reputesanddrag has a reputation beyond reputesanddrag has a reputation beyond reputesanddrag has a reputation beyond reputesanddrag has a reputation beyond reputesanddrag has a reputation beyond reputesanddrag has a reputation beyond reputesanddrag has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Banebot Transmission Issues

While we're on the topic, I'll write out our notes about the big planetaries (included in the KOP) and the dual motor adapters. The "step key" included with the dual motor kit was about 1/16" too long. Also, While it does keep them on, I'm not fond of the pointed set screws in the shaft collars. Also, the screws that hold the planetary body onto the backplate seem weak We broke one. The gears are alright. One of them had a slight bind and is pretty noisy. Not sure where the noise is coming from. When we first ran them, we drew 7.5 amps (at 12V) between two motors. After 15 minutes or so, that was down to 5 amps (for the both).

Use blue loctite on everything.
__________________
Teacher/Engineer/Machinist - Team 696 Circuit Breakers, 2011 - Present
Mentor/Engineer/Machinist, Team 968 RAWC, 2007-2010
Technical Mentor, Team 696 Circuit Breakers, 2005-2007
Student Mechanical Leader and Driver, Team 696 Circuit Breakers, 2002-2004
  #32   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-01-2007, 21:55
Ben Piecuch Ben Piecuch is offline
Bengineer
no team
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 336
Ben Piecuch has a reputation beyond reputeBen Piecuch has a reputation beyond reputeBen Piecuch has a reputation beyond reputeBen Piecuch has a reputation beyond reputeBen Piecuch has a reputation beyond reputeBen Piecuch has a reputation beyond reputeBen Piecuch has a reputation beyond reputeBen Piecuch has a reputation beyond reputeBen Piecuch has a reputation beyond reputeBen Piecuch has a reputation beyond reputeBen Piecuch has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Banebot Transmission Issues

Whoa, let me get a grip on what you're saying here Joe.

You're saying that the FIRST Supplied Kit gearbox, the 56mm, small CIM, primary drive 12:1 ratio gearbox is barely adequate (about 2x factor of safety) for a single CIM install under cyclic loading. Yet, FIRST and Banebots offer a 2x CIM adapter for use in these exact transmissions? Doesn't this 2x CIM adapter effectively reduce my factor of safety on that double-D to 1x?
(I won't even get into the gear change option that brings this gearbox to a 16:1 ratio...)

Is this a good thing? Am I supposed to feel confident in the fact that FIRST and Banebots have given us a product to hang ourselves with? And, to discover this at week 3 into our build? I'm a little disturbed here!

I can understand doing my own Due Diligence on a COTS part that I purchased for my robot. But I should't expect to have to do the same to a FIRST supplied and mechanically approved part(s.) Correctly me if I'm wrong here, Joe. (Please...)

BEN
  #33   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-01-2007, 21:56
Dan Petrovic's Avatar
Dan Petrovic Dan Petrovic is offline
Got my degree and ready for more!
FRC #0166 (Chop Shop)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Merrimack NH
Posts: 1,668
Dan Petrovic has a reputation beyond reputeDan Petrovic has a reputation beyond reputeDan Petrovic has a reputation beyond reputeDan Petrovic has a reputation beyond reputeDan Petrovic has a reputation beyond reputeDan Petrovic has a reputation beyond reputeDan Petrovic has a reputation beyond reputeDan Petrovic has a reputation beyond reputeDan Petrovic has a reputation beyond reputeDan Petrovic has a reputation beyond reputeDan Petrovic has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Banebot Transmission Issues

Is there any easy way to avoid this problem?

Such as supporting the drive shaft on both sides? I already knew that sideloads are never good for planetary gearboxes, but could they really ruin them like this?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koko Ed View Post
The sign applause was definately one of the best moments I had ever witnessed at a FIRST event.
Who knew silence could be so loud?

Mayhem in Merrimack hosts: 2005-2016 - Week Zero hosts in partnership with FIRST HQ: 2014-2016
  #34   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-01-2007, 22:21
Rosiebotboss's Avatar
Rosiebotboss Rosiebotboss is offline
2015-16 Divisional LRI - Archimedes
AKA: Dana P. Henry
FRC #0839 (Rosie Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Agawam, MA
Posts: 855
Rosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Rosiebotboss
Re: Banebot Transmission Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Piecuch View Post
Whoa, let me get a grip on what you're saying here Joe.

You're saying that the FIRST Supplied Kit gearbox, the 56mm, small CIM, primary drive 12:1 ratio gearbox is barely adequate (about 2x factor of safety) for a single CIM install under cyclic loading. Yet, FIRST and Banebots offer a 2x CIM adapter for use in these exact transmissions? Doesn't this 2x CIM adapter effectively reduce my factor of safety on that double-D to 1x?
(I won't even get into the gear change option that brings this gearbox to a 16:1 ratio...)

Is this a good thing? Am I supposed to feel confident in the fact that FIRST and Banebots have given us a product to hang ourselves with? And, to discover this at week 3 into our build? I'm a little disturbed here!

I can understand doing my own Due Diligence on a COTS part that I purchased for my robot. But I should't expect to have to do the same to a FIRST supplied and mechanically approved part(s.) Correctly me if I'm wrong here, Joe. (Please...)

BEN
Ben and Joe,

You're both making me nervous. We are in the same boat. Having trusted FIRST to do some of the "due diligence" for us, we are using the 2 into 1 adaptor as well.
I do not have any experience with the set up yet as we have not powered up the drive train yet. Although, Ben, check the run out of the 2 spur gears that mesh the CIMs into the BB 'top hat'. One of the sets out of three we bought is out by a lot, probably 5-10 degrees. Too much for my taste, BB has an email to answer.
__________________
Co-Founder/Mentor FRC Team 839 / JrFLL Team 137/Rosie Robotics/Agawam HS
Winner NEF District WPI 2016
Regional CA-08 Boston, 12 WPI, Eng'g Excellence, 12-15 UL Safety, 15 Motorola Quality
KPCB Entrepreneurship 04, 05, 06, 07, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16
Rookie All Star and Top Rookie Seed 2002
Paul Harris Fellow, CMP Inspector 05-16, Head LRI NE FIRST JTB 1944-2008 "What did you do with your dash?"
  #35   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-01-2007, 22:51
dtengineering's Avatar
dtengineering dtengineering is offline
Teaching Teachers to Teach Tech
AKA: Jason Brett
no team (British Columbia FRC teams)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,833
dtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond reputedtengineering has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Banebot Transmission Issues

While the possible weakness in the 56mm gearboxes leaves me with some concern, the "don't stall the little gearboxes" warning was made last year.

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...light=banebots

In the right application, with proper design the small BB transmissions work great. We used a 5:1 reduction running off an FP on our shooter last year with no problems... and have a couple 256:1 ones sitting on the shelf waiting for a job to come along for them. Since they will run off FP's, which let out the "magic smoke" pretty quickly as they approach stall, we try to keep the FP's down to 10A or less and within the torque limits.

I am sure that as I type, however, there are people working on clarifying any problems with the 56mm gear box and developing a solution.

I'll keep my fingers crossed,

Jason
  #36   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-01-2007, 10:16
Joe Johnson's Avatar Unsung FIRST Hero
Joe Johnson Joe Johnson is offline
Engineer at Medrobotics
AKA: Dr. Joe
FRC #0088 (TJ2)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: May 2001
Rookie Year: 1996
Location: Raynham, MA
Posts: 2,648
Joe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Banebot Transmission Issues

Many folks imagine that FIRST has more resources that they really have. As a practical matter, there is nobody in Manchester with team experience. There are great people working for FIRST, but they just don't have the team experience.

The 56mm Banebot transmission was designed specifically for FIRST. Banebots asked me to help them with the requirements, which I gladly did. At this point, I wish I would have spent more time analizing the gearbox. It was not until after the kickoff (when I saw the picture of the 4:1 gearstage from Banebots' website that allows the 56mm gearbox to convert to 16:1) that the double D joint came to my attention. I should have noticed it sooner, but it just didn't come to my mind.

FIRST insisted on the 2 motor solution. I was not a big fan of it, but I did not oppose it either. After seeing the double D joint, I was very worried.

Seeing a picture of a FIRST test mule made me think that perhaps FIRST did not do enough testing. The picture has been removed. For those who did not see it, it had a long unsupported shaft that simply could not have stalled 2 CIM motors.

Initial calculations did not provide comforting answers. I have spent 3 weeks getting the data I need to make a reasonable recommendation. Yelling the sky is falling when it is only an acorn is just as damaging to FIRST as failing kit gearboxes.

What I still don't know is what is the dynamic load that a single motor CIM gearbox with 12:1 ratio. We really need someone to build up a 120lbs test mule and just cycle it Full forward, full reverse for about 500 cycles and then open the gearboxes up to see how much the double d had turned into a bow tie*. This is a big question. Is this just a problem for the 2 motor CIM adaptor or is it a problem that is more widespread. At this point, we don't know.

The fix is not that hard, but it is not free either.

As to whether we should have caught this earlier, yes, I believe we should have. But, mistakes are part of the human condition. Me, FIRST, Banebots, the subcontractor that builds the parts, there is plenty of blame to go around.

Right now, we need to understand the extent of the problem and come up with the best solution possible.

Joe J.

* see the attached photo for an idea of what happens to the joint. This was done with 100 cycles of +/-40in-lbs torque (approx. 2 CIMs). During the test, it was clear that each cycle is opening up the joint. I started with about 180 degrees of backlash at the input to the transmission. By the 100th cycle, the doulbe d had opened to the bowtie shown in the photo and the backlash was over 270 degrees.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	56mm 12to1 final Carrier 100cycles at 40in-lbs aaa.JPG
Views:	134
Size:	46.4 KB
ID:	4952  
__________________
Joseph M. Johnson, Ph.D., P.E.
Mentor
Team #88, TJ2

Last edited by Joe Johnson : 29-01-2007 at 10:26.
  #37   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-01-2007, 10:39
MrForbes's Avatar
MrForbes MrForbes is offline
Registered User
AKA: Jim
FRC #1726 (N.E.R.D.S.)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Sierra Vista AZ
Posts: 6,038
MrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Banebot Transmission Issues

To help those of us who have not disassembled one of these gearboxes understand the situation, am I correct in assuming the output shaft has two flats on it, which fit into the Double D hole?
  #38   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-01-2007, 10:46
Joe Johnson's Avatar Unsung FIRST Hero
Joe Johnson Joe Johnson is offline
Engineer at Medrobotics
AKA: Dr. Joe
FRC #0088 (TJ2)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: May 2001
Rookie Year: 1996
Location: Raynham, MA
Posts: 2,648
Joe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Banebot Transmission Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by squirrel View Post
To help those of us who have not disassembled one of these gearboxes understand the situation, am I correct in assuming the output shaft has two flats on it, which fit into the Double D hole?
Yes, see photo below.

The shaft is essentially 2X as hard as the carrier. I think the easiest fix will be to get harder carriers made.

Joe J.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	56mm 12to1 final shaft100cycles at 40in-lbs bbb.JPG
Views:	103
Size:	47.2 KB
ID:	4953  
__________________
Joseph M. Johnson, Ph.D., P.E.
Mentor
Team #88, TJ2
  #39   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-01-2007, 10:53
Kevin Sevcik's Avatar
Kevin Sevcik Kevin Sevcik is offline
(Insert witty comment here)
FRC #0057 (The Leopards)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 1998
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,758
Kevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Kevin Sevcik Send a message via Yahoo to Kevin Sevcik
Re: Banebot Transmission Issues

Joe,

What are the odds of getting a cad drawing of the carrier(s) to facilitate getting new ones EDMed or otherwise fabricated? Seems to me that enough teams are facing this issue that going in together on an order from eMachineshop or an EDM house would be fairly economical.
__________________
The difficult we do today; the impossible we do tomorrow. Miracles by appointment only.

Lone Star Regional Troubleshooter
  #40   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-01-2007, 10:59
NeedMoreEngines's Avatar
NeedMoreEngines NeedMoreEngines is offline
Registered User
AKA: Mike
FRC #1279 (Cold Fusion)
Team Role: Driver
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Somervile, New Jersey
Posts: 124
NeedMoreEngines has a spectacular aura aboutNeedMoreEngines has a spectacular aura about
Send a message via AIM to NeedMoreEngines
Re: Banebot Transmission Issues

Well, I've been reading through this thread, and I'm about to throw up.

We bought the 2-CIM adaptor for the 56mm planetaries.
We bought the 16:1 conversion kits.


Somewhere, some mechanical engineer reading this post is laughing his head off.

We've basically done what everyone has been saying NOT to do.

What still bothers me is this:
Why would FIRST supply us with products that clearly were not properly engineered? Or, look at it this way. Maybe these things are substantial. FIRST usually does things the right way, wouldn't they have faith in the company that is supplying such a critical component in the KOP?

I...I don't know what to say. I am at a toal loss for words. I want to have faith in the 56mm's, but everyone is basically saying "ehh...notsomuch!"
__________________
"There is only one solution to this problem- We need more engines."

The good thing about the YMCA is if you can spell, you can dance.

Proud Eagle Scout
  #41   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-01-2007, 11:36
Joe Johnson's Avatar Unsung FIRST Hero
Joe Johnson Joe Johnson is offline
Engineer at Medrobotics
AKA: Dr. Joe
FRC #0088 (TJ2)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: May 2001
Rookie Year: 1996
Location: Raynham, MA
Posts: 2,648
Joe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Banebot Transmission Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedMoreEngines View Post
Well, I've been reading through this thread, and I'm about to throw up.

We bought the 2-CIM adaptor for the 56mm planetaries.
We bought the 16:1 conversion kits.

Somewhere, some mechanical engineer reading this post is laughing his head off.

We've basically done what everyone has been saying NOT to do.

What still bothers me is this:
Why would FIRST supply us with products that clearly were not properly engineered? Or, look at it this way. Maybe these things are substantial. FIRST usually does things the right way, wouldn't they have faith in the company that is supplying such a critical component in the KOP?

I...I don't know what to say. I am at a toal loss for words. I want to have faith in the 56mm's, but everyone is basically saying "ehh...notsomuch!"
I cannot disagree with you more strongly.

It is not clear at all that we will see failures in the field of this joint.

Looking at the design, my gut told me that perhaps there might be a problem. I have done quite a lot of work to try to get the answer to the questions.

Again, you image that FIRST has a Great Oz working behind the scenes to ensure that there is never a mistake made. Trust me, there is no Great Oz. There are only frail human beings trying their best to get great things in the KOP without breaking the bank.

Now back to the problem at hand. Contrary to my initial gut feeling, my analysis up to this point leads me to believe that if the carriers were hardened to the same spec as the shaft, the gearbox will likely perform without failures, even for the 2 CIM + 16:1 set up. This is a pretty straightforward fix that should not cause an undue hardship on any team.

Again, the big unknow is the dynamic loading we expect. Is there a team availalble that can quickly adapt a chassis as a test buck for me? I want to do 4 tests each with a 120lbs robot, 500 cycles of
1) apply full forward,
2) reach full speed forward,
3) apply full reverse,
4) reach full speed in reverse
5) repeat
Test 1: 12:1 gearbox 1 CIM per side
Test 2: 12:1 gearbox W/2 CIM adaptor
Test 3: 16:1 gearbox 1 CIM per side
Test 4: 16:1 gearbox W/2 CIM adaptor

The motors/gearboxes needed to do these tests will be provided.

Are there any takers? PM me ASAP.

Joe J.
__________________
Joseph M. Johnson, Ph.D., P.E.
Mentor
Team #88, TJ2
  #42   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-01-2007, 11:58
Mark McLeod's Avatar
Mark McLeod Mark McLeod is online now
Just Itinerant
AKA: Hey dad...Father...MARK
FRC #0358 (Robotic Eagles)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Hauppauge, Long Island, NY
Posts: 8,929
Mark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Banebot Transmission Issues

For a controlled test I'd think you'd want to put the test article in an enclosed track and let the RC run it back and forth autonomously.

Ramp up/down or jump right to full forward and immediately switch to full reverse? Could also run a variety of both to simulate different driver styles.

We can do that for you if you don't get a closer volunteer team. We have spare kitbots.
__________________
"Rationality is our distinguishing characteristic - it's what sets us apart from the beasts." - Aristotle

Last edited by Mark McLeod : 29-01-2007 at 12:01.
  #43   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-01-2007, 12:01
Paul Copioli's Avatar Unsung FIRST Hero Woodie Flowers Award
Paul Copioli Paul Copioli is offline
President, VEX Robotics, Inc.
FRC #3310 (Black Hawk Robotics)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Rockwall, TX
Posts: 1,393
Paul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Banebot Transmission Issues

O.K. I have kept quiet long enough.

The bottom line is that FIRST had a solution for the kit drive train that could also be used for an arm. They used it for two years with the only reported failures being from teams who did not lubricate the gearbox. It was designed and TESTED before it was placed in the kit. A 120 lb. prototype mule was created, beat against a wall, durability tested and shipped to Manchester in August of 2004 so they could do more testing. It was already in the kit and no more work had to be done.

The Banebot solution was a cost down effort by FIRST, plain and simple. This is O.K., but testing needed to be completed.

My question is why wasn't the same rigor a MINIMUM requirement for the BaneBots solution? If this was not tested on an actual robot before delivery to FIRST, then that is a huge oversight ... HUGE!

Now Dr. Joe,

You and I agree about 99.5% on things engineering, but you and I are polar opposites on this one. You made this comment:

Quote:
I believe that the higher ratios are even useful, but more for speed reduction not torque increase. The output joint is the same for every ratio. If the torque gets too high it will break that joint.
C'mon. You get the torque increase as a result of the increased ratio. It is there whether you want it or not. While you can design your arm to not need it it will always have the ability. If your arm gets stuck, wedged, etc. then the motor will output that torque and you will have almost nothing to say about it. Gearboxes must be designed so the motor is the weak link. If you are reducing the FP (or Banebot) motor to get to a reasonable speed, then you better design the gearbox to handle the torque.

If BB offers a 256:1 ratio that is meant for a specific motor, then it better be able to handle the torque. If they offer a conversion kit to add a second CIM motor, then the gearbox better be able to handle the maximum possible torque the CIM motors can output.

If the gearboxes are not designed this way, then we will have a lot of robots that can make a perfect circle with their drive base.

I am now officially worried about teams using the new kit transmission with 2 motors. My calculations do'nt look good ....

-Paul

Last edited by Paul Copioli : 29-01-2007 at 12:27.
  #44   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-01-2007, 12:03
Dad1279 Dad1279 is offline
Registered User
FRC #1279 (Cold Fusion)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 511
Dad1279 has much to be proud ofDad1279 has much to be proud ofDad1279 has much to be proud ofDad1279 has much to be proud ofDad1279 has much to be proud ofDad1279 has much to be proud ofDad1279 has much to be proud ofDad1279 has much to be proud ofDad1279 has much to be proud of
Re: Banebot Transmission Issues

Sorry Mike, although I understand your frustration, there will always be minor setbacks in life. A valuable lesson can be learned from this group working together to arrive at a solution. Remember, until 2 years ago, we didn't even get a frame or transmission in the kit.

Joe, you have a PM. Team 1279 has the transmission pieces available, and a prior year robot that we should be able to use as a test bed.
  #45   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-01-2007, 12:15
Joe Johnson's Avatar Unsung FIRST Hero
Joe Johnson Joe Johnson is offline
Engineer at Medrobotics
AKA: Dr. Joe
FRC #0088 (TJ2)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: May 2001
Rookie Year: 1996
Location: Raynham, MA
Posts: 2,648
Joe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Johnson has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Banebot Transmission Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Copioli View Post
O.K. I have kept quiet long enough.

snip

The Banebot solution was a cost down effort by FIRST, plain and simple. This is O.K., but testing needed to be completed.

My question is why wasn't the same rigor a MINIMUM requirement for the BaneBots solution? If this was not tested on an actual robot before delivery to FIRST, then that is a huge oversight ... HUGE!

snip

If the gearboxes are not designed this way, then we will have a lot of robots that can make a perfect circle with their drive base.

I am now officially worried about teams using the new kit transmission with 2 motors. My calculations do'nt look good ....

-Paul
You have some good points. I am not happy that this is where the world ended up. There were supposed to be testing done. In retrospect, it was not enough. There is plenty of room for blame and finger pointing.

Believe me, I realize the damage this does to FIRST.

Me and others are trying to work out a solution.

Joe J.
__________________
Joseph M. Johnson, Ph.D., P.E.
Mentor
Team #88, TJ2
Closed Thread


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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
small banebot motor with 64:1 gearbox burkey_turkey Motors 16 29-01-2007 01:48
BaneBot Transmission Encoder Daru Motors 9 27-01-2007 23:17
Banebot 2 motor adapter Ben Piecuch Motors 5 17-01-2007 16:06
Banebot 64 to 1 on Spike? falconmaster Motors 7 15-01-2007 22:12
Banebot Gearbox chris31 Technical Discussion 45 15-01-2007 17:56


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 13:40.

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