pic: FRC294 Prototype base

[Madison]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

We were fine traction wise with 5/8" tread, we're running 1" now so it doesn't wear out as fast; either way, it's the same amount of traction. There's no need to run thickner center wheels, and for turning we have a lowered center.

For the 4-speed we are well past traction liminted in 1st and 2nd gear, 3rd and 4th aren't but we won't be pushing in those. If we have the FPs to spare then even 3rd will be traction limited. Most likely for the season we will run AM Gen3 shifters, we just wanted something cool to play with.

If you're traction-limited in both 1st and 2nd gear, why not eliminate 1st altogether? What benefit does it provide?

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by M. Krass

If you're traction-limited in both 1st and 2nd gear, why not eliminate 1st altogether? What benefit does it provide?

We'll probably lock out 2nd gear in code....

you got to cut us some slack on the practicality ; We know 4 speeds is overkill, but we figured since we can just bolt on AndyMarks during the season, why not try something cool now? It's the offseason, time to try cool stuff.... And in all honesty, who hasn't wanted to build a 4-speed? We all know they're impractical for most games, but that doesn't take away from how cool they are.

[Madison]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

We'll probably lock out 2nd gear in code....

you got to cut us some slack on the practicality ; We know 4 speeds is overkill, but we figured since we can just bolt on AndyMarks during the season, why not try something cool now?

Now is the best time to experiment for many teams. We're also focusing a bit on some experimentation this Fall, of course.

I am not too familiar with 33's design for a transmission, so I thought it might be easier, faster and more reliable if you were to eliminate a redundant gear from its design. That said, it may also be more work and more time to make changes to it than not.

I have to be all about practicality because the Fall is the time when the mentors and I get to play around and introduce new ideas to our students, but at the same time, we're spending a lot of money doing so. I need to be able to justify the expense now with tangible benefits later. I can't spend $1000 of the team's money on something that we couldn't possibly use or build in a six-week crunch, y'know?

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by M. Krass

Now is the best time to experiment for many teams. We're also focusing a bit on some experimentation this Fall, of course.

I am not too familiar with 33's design for a transmission, so I thought it might be easier, faster and more reliable if you were to eliminate a redundant gear from its design. That said, it may also be more work and more time to make changes to it than not.

I have to be all about practicality because the Fall is the time when the mentors and I get to play around and introduce new ideas to our students, but at the same time, we're spending a lot of money doing so. I need to be able to justify the expense now with tangible benefits later. I can't spend $1000 of the team's money on something that we couldn't possibly use or build in a six-week crunch, y'know?

We have a two speed variant of team 33's that was the same cost in materials to build, so once again we went for cool; both were cheaper than buying AMs though. There is no sense in making it a 3-speed, it is two 2-speeds in series now. If we gave them inverse ratios we could have [AA,AB, BA, BB] (best way to visualize it i geuss) but AB and BA would be the same ratio, so we just made it 4.

these are being built for about the cost of a single AM shifter, so that's not too bad. Also, we have a lot of excess stock/hardware that could be used during the season now.