Go to Post This is one case where I really wish Andymark didn't listen to their customers so well. - ASD20 [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
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2009, 11:23
DMetalKong's Avatar
DMetalKong DMetalKong is offline
Registered User
AKA: David K.
no team
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Bridgewater
Posts: 144
DMetalKong is a jewel in the roughDMetalKong is a jewel in the roughDMetalKong is a jewel in the rough
Send a message via AIM to DMetalKong
12.75:1 enough?

Okay, I was working with some numbers and this is what I came up with for a 2 CIM drive (1 driving each side of the robot).

Torque supplied by 1 CIM at peak efficiency = 0.48 N m = 4.25 lbf in.
Torque supplied by 2 CIMs = 4.25 * 2 = 8.5 lbf in.

Max. Frictional Force = [150 lbf (robot) + 40 lbf (trailer)] * 0.2 (rounding the COF up quite a bit) = 38 lbf.

Max. Torque = 38 lbf * 3 in (wheel radius) = 114 lbf in.

Torque needed/Torque provided = 114/8.5 = 13.4.

A toughbox provides a 12.75:1 reduction. Does anyone think that this will be sufficient for powering a robot?
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2009, 11:38
Jared Russell's Avatar
Jared Russell Jared Russell is offline
Taking a year (mostly) off
FRC #0254 (The Cheesy Poofs), FRC #0341 (Miss Daisy)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,082
Jared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 12.75:1 enough?

The maximum frictional force is not 150lbs + 40lbs. The trailer wheels are not powered and so don't add to your maximum tractive force. The tongue weight, however, will help you - let's call it 10 lbs (probably an overestimate). So your downforce is 160lbs.

This means that the maximum tractive force (with 0.2 CoF) is .2*160lbs = 32 lbf.

Max torque = 32lbf * 3in = 96 lbf*in

Torque needed/torque provided = 96/8.5 = 11.3

And realistically the CoF is 0.1 or below, so I think direct drive off the ToughBoxes provides more than enough torque (with 1 motor per side).
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2009, 11:38
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: 3,744
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: 12.75:1 enough?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DMetalKong View Post
Okay, I was working with some numbers and this is what I came up with for a 2 CIM drive (1 driving each side of the robot).

Torque supplied by 1 CIM at peak efficiency = 0.48 N m = 4.25 lbf in.
Torque supplied by 2 CIMs = 4.25 * 2 = 8.5 lbf in.

Max. Frictional Force = [150 lbf (robot) + 40 lbf (trailer)] * 0.2 (rounding the COF up quite a bit) = 38 lbf.

Max. Torque = 38 lbf * 3 in (wheel radius) = 114 lbf in.

Torque needed/Torque provided = 114/8.5 = 13.4.

A toughbox provides a 12.75:1 reduction. Does anyone think that this will be sufficient for powering a robot?
You should take a look at the motor curves, you'll almost never be running your CIMs at peak efficiency. It's better to look at 50% stall (peak power) and 25% stall, which is where you'd like your motors running most of the time.

50% Stall torque = 2 x 21.5 lbf-in x 50% x 12.75 = 275 lbf-in.
25% Stall torque = 2 x 21.5 lbf-in x 25% x 12.75 = 137 lbf-in.

So I think a 2 CIM drive with the stock transmissions and a 1:1 sprocket ratio will work out just fine. Especially as you won't be getting the full 40 lbs out of the trailer, and the CoF isn't .2
__________________
The difficult we do today; the impossible we do tomorrow. Miracles by appointment only.

Lone Star Regional Troubleshooter
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2009, 11:43
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: 6,033
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: 12.75:1 enough?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abwehr View Post
The tongue weight, however, will help you - let's call it 10 lbs (probably an overestimate).
Retired Starman built a competition type trailer and measured the weight (35 lbs), and the tongue weight (5 lbs).
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2009, 11:43
R.C.'s Avatar
R.C. R.C. is online now
2017... Oooh Kill em, Swerve!
AKA: Owner, WestCoast Products
FRC #1323 (MadTown Robotics)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Madera, CA
Posts: 2,186
R.C. has a reputation beyond reputeR.C. has a reputation beyond reputeR.C. has a reputation beyond reputeR.C. has a reputation beyond reputeR.C. has a reputation beyond reputeR.C. has a reputation beyond reputeR.C. has a reputation beyond reputeR.C. has a reputation beyond reputeR.C. has a reputation beyond reputeR.C. has a reputation beyond reputeR.C. has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 12.75:1 enough?

I was thinking more of a 8-9:1 Ratio with one motor per side. But thatz just me.
__________________
R.C.
Owner, WestCoast Products || Twitter
MadTown Robotics Team 1323
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
Is 12 hours enough? Heretic121 Technical Discussion 15 29-03-2006 09:28
pic: Close enough? S.Nickens Robot Showcase 11 12-02-2005 00:34
Is PBasic enough or not punarhero Programming 2 05-03-2004 07:59
Enough with the bumpers! archiver 2000 2 23-06-2002 22:32
Enough already... Gui Cavalcanti Rules/Strategy 3 08-04-2002 09:35


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 15:28.

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