pic: Team 221 LLC. - Wild Swerve Module

[Ryan Dognaux]

This. Is. Awesome. I would love to see one of these in person (hopefully at IRI)

It's also good to see that the timeless debate of using off the shelf solutions is still alive and well. I think it's a great thing to level the playing field for teams that may (or may not) understand the concepts of a swerve drive but do not have the machining ability to create one. As Mr. Taylor said, it's a great opportunity for teams to acquire these, learn from them and potentially modify them to meet their own needs.

Originally Posted by Taylor

Furthermore, it would probably take us a couple years to get our heads wrapped around the system that WildStang has been refining since 1868.

I actually found a picture of this 1868 early Wildstang concept -

[ajlapp]

For the somewhat moral issue of having a swerve module that we can just purchase rather than build, I can go either way on this one. First pass at the design looks great though! Once it hits production and is for sale, will you post the CAD files somewhere?

Yes. Team 221 LLC. considers itself a limited open-source organization. We currently offer drawings and solid models for most Universal Chassis products on our website. We will continue this practice with the Wild Swerve.

Consumer priced swerve modules are also in the works from myself, Sean and RC. Guess we'll continue that even after seeing this.

Please do. Also, If you're not ready to start a company, source components, build prototypes, invest and endure lots of criticism contact Team 221 LLC. offline. We're continually designing and considering new product concepts for all types of robot/engineering applications.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Anthony, glad to see this. You do like to cause debates don't you? Here is my take on the whole issue, no one says you have to use it. If FIRST came out and said that we can't manufacture anything anymore it all has to be COTS I think we would all laugh at them. Craig if you don't want to use it don't. More importantly, who said even if you DID use it that you had to use it for a drive train? Seems to me there are some parts in there that could be used for a turret or a ball shooter.

What is the estimated weight? Sensor options? Motor options? (Can I use a FP through a Planetary if I want to?) Will individual parts be available? 6" wheels are too big, when (if ever) will you get around to offering us an option to use smaller wheels? It really does look great Anthony, keep up the good work.

[thefro526]

These Swerve Modules are pretty awesome.... If they would've been availible in years past I think I would've definitely considered using them.

But this brings up a good question that we as a community may need to address and some of us have already addressed in this thread. At what point in time do we draw the line between what we buy and use and what we don't?

[gren737]

[quote=
At the same time, I doubt anyone wants to get to a point where teams have to manufacture their own gears, sprockets, and wheels (talk about a high-resource advantage there, you'd need C&C or laser cutting just to get out the door).
/QUOTE]

FIRST moved past this a long long time ago. Yes there was a time when you could not buy metal sprockets or gears and if you wanted to use them you had to make your own. I think a couple came in the kit for the drivetrain and that was it. Small Parts Inc was the only catalog you could purchase parts from and there was an absurdly low limit like $400 total or something close.

While I'm not a big fan of ready made bolt on FIRST parts, like drivetrains, shifters etc. I most certainly do not want to go back to the days of making sprockets again either. And no, you don't need a cnc or a laser jet to do that, a bridgeport and prototrac will do nicely.

I think the discussion here is the difference between standard off the shelf parts that you can buy that weren't designed for a FIRST robot vs. ones that were designed specifically for a FIRST robot.

but...just wanted to point out the fact, COTS items have not always been allowed.

[Jared Russell]

Does anyone from Team 221 LLC have weight information on these (I understanding that they are prototypes)?

[EricH]

You know, this could be a really effective teaching tool. Simply get a set pre-season and play with it. See if it's worth doing swerve, get some practice, reverse engineer the pods, improve them, etc. Then, when it's time for the season, you can design your own (or order and mod) much more easily and effectively.

Think of this as like training wheels on a bicycle. They help you balance until you're ready to do the real thing.

[ttldomination]

Would these modules be FIRST legal? Like if a team would purchase these items...technically they're not "off the shelf" items...I'm not too familiar about the rules on this.

Just a though.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by ttldomination

Would these modules be FIRST legal? Like if a team would purchase these items...technically they're not "off the shelf" items...I'm not too familiar about the rules on this.

Just a though.

The should fall under the same category as AndyMark transmissions or Team221's other products. [Standard disclaimer about rules changing year to year here]

EDIT: In response to Cory below me:

I have to second the feeling that more teams moving reliably is a good thing. Using the Kettering Rookie Regional in 2008 as an example we only had 1 machine not move reliably, the reason? They tried to do a crab drive their first year out and refused to accept any help (No I will not reveal who they were, I simply do not recall). To teams that feel asking for help or using something that is already in place makes you 'less' a team I am going to tell you something, ASK FOR HELP! Anthony and the rest of Team221 are willing to help and you should never turn aside help. I have struggled most of my life about asking for help, after my first couple negative reviews I quickly swallowed my pride and take assistance when I need it. Pride cometh before the fall. If you think for one second that if 330 were building a swerve drive and needed help and they had access to one of 111's old robots they wouldn't peek under the tie-dye you are hopelessly mistake (330 was used as an example I have no affiliation nor can I be 100% sure I am correct, please take this as it was intended and don't be offended. Thank You) There is nothing wrong with admitting you don't know, many people, myself included, will respect a person more for admitting they don't know than making something up.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by thefro526

These Swerve Modules are pretty awesome.... If they would've been availible in years past I think I would've definitely considered using them.

But this brings up a good question that we as a community may need to address and some of us have already addressed in this thread. At what point in time do we draw the line between what we buy and use and what we don't?

We draw the line wherever the GDC defines the line to be.

In the past that has been that "complete mobility systems" are not allowed.

I'm not sure why people care so much. Let's say this is legal. How many teams are going to buy it? 10? 50? I'd guess almost certainly no more than that. There probably aren't more than 100 teams who even construct a swerve drive in a given year. It's not like they can just purchase this and allot 2 days to drivetrain construction/assembly, since it was a COTS item. There's going to be TONS of time associated with programming, and a good amount with mounting everything. I see nothing "unfair" here.

I would hope that this drive system could help those teams that choose to make a swerve, and end up with a system that is not robust and not very functional. Instead of cobbling something together, they could use this.

The more robots that drive reliably, the better.

[pacoliketaco]

I read most of this thread already, and as soon as i saw the picture, i was practically disappointed. I know that is not a very nice thing to say, but i dont see this at all to be in the spirit of FIRST. as far as i can see, swerve drive is very complex, and should only be attempted by teams with the capabilities to make one themselves. and FIRST is about learning, not buying pre-built modules from other teams. even your universal chassis, which looks very nice, i am not a fan of. my team has always had extremely limited machining capabilities (hacksaws, hand held drills, and maybe a circular saw to cut 8020) but we still manage to make effective robots. this makes me very jealous when a team comes out and says "look at our brand new CNC mill" but to me, one team making parts, and selling them to other teams is just not right. maybe if you were willing to teach other teams how to, but not to actually make the parts for them. especially something as complex as a swerve drive. whatever. i guess you are doing this to make money, which is fair. good luck with selling these, im sure they will be popular, just as AM mecanums were in 2007.

[Rich Kressly]

Originally Posted by pacoliketaco

I read most of this thread already, and as soon as i saw the picture, i was practically disappointed. I know that is not a very nice thing to say, but i dont see this at all to be in the spirit of FIRST.

However, it isn't up to you to speak on behalf of FIRST as to what that "spirit" is, is it? Why say something that you know isn't nice? I'd challenge you to find me any worthwhile description of FIRST's spirit that specifically addresses, inhibits, excludes, or discourages this practice.

Originally Posted by pacoliketaco

as far as i can see, swerve drive is very complex, and should only be attempted by teams with the capabilities to make one themselves. and FIRST is about learning, not buying pre-built modules from other teams.

Sorry, but this statement is pure baloney. Why shouldn't ANYONE attempt ANYTHING they desire to in this world (provided laws aren't being broken, etc)? If the team supports this idea and this is their way in the door, I say AWESOME even though I also run one of those teams who has similar tooling resources like you speak of ... and since when does buying a pre-built anything preclude you from teaching? There are a ton of ways to learn with these..mechanically, programming, reverse engineering, pre-season training, ...

Originally Posted by pacoliketaco

my team has always had extremely limited machining capabilities (hacksaws, hand held drills, and maybe a circular saw to cut 8020) but we still manage to make effective robots. this makes me very jealous when a team comes out and says "look at our brand new CNC mill"

Why let jealousy enter the picture at all? There's a ton of ways to use this as inspiration and motivation instead. I have yet to see a game in FRC that "required" swerve drive. How about "Let's find the Allentown, NJ way to out-build, out-strategize, and outplay these swerve teams using our own resources." OR "Let's deconstruct these CAD files and find a way to build our own.." Or ... geeze...be inspired by what others are able to do ... even when you believe you can "never" have "that" for your team. Who knows maybe one of your students will be inspired enough to design swerve modules in industry someday or will get to run one of those CNC's at work because he/she decided to pursue the education/opportunity because they were exposed to it through another FRC team. I mean it's possible we're all here to help make all of that happen for as many students as possible and the robot competition thingy is secondary, right?

Originally Posted by pacoliketaco

but to me, one team making parts, and selling them to other teams is just not right. maybe if you were willing to teach other teams how to, but not to actually make the parts for them. especially something as complex as a swerve drive. whatever. i guess you are doing this to make money, which is fair. good luck with selling these, im sure they will be popular, just as AM mecanums were in 2007.

Hakuna Matata...to each his own. Is 221, LLC the team 221 or an offshoot thereof? I suppose you might think AndyMark is 45, which would also be false. In the end, why the heck don't you want to see the bar higher for all teams with more resources/possibilities for all? Why on earth should we stunt the growth of progress for all teams? Look at the history of design and the way things advance. More affordable, readily available resources is always a driving force for this. Why on earth should FRC be any different?

I hope after careful reflection and after you trade in jealousy for inspiration, you might reconsider your position here.

namaste

[Bob Steele]

I wish good luck to 221 in their endeavor. Engineering business is something we all need experience in along with design. If they can make these and people want and can afford them and they are within the rules... more power to them...

I know that when our team decided to design its own swerve drive this year that it was one of the best things we could have done. (We made that decision after the Kickoff)

Our team was very proud of its design and its particular way of controlling our Skunk Swerve. Everyone on the team participated in the design, fabrication and assembly of the modules. It was very much a team design.

I watched the pride our team members showed in the design and the interest they all took in the problems we encountered and how we overcame those problems in design and control.

After all, it is the process that is important....the working with mentors and looking at designs and doing the systems work to decide what approach to implement.

To me, teams do this in different ways. Teams can be very successful in using off the shelf solutions.... but how does that hurt the design? If those solutions are within the rules.... use them....

We don't have to design everything...I can also remember having to cut gears and design transmissions.... things used to be different.

Teams can be successful in many ways....
For those teams that think that this is not fair...to just purchase components and put them together.... I say, why is this unfair?

It is the way of real life. When we design machines we don't design every single bolt or gear.... or even transmission....Does anyone design their own motors? Some do.... but many rely on industries that specialize in those designs.... we check specs ... pick a motor.... and design around it.

i don't see this as unfair or unjust in any way...

Having a shifting transmission or a swerve drive or any other component does not guarantee success. It still has to be incorporated into the larger design strategy for the game...The longer you are around FIRST (or anything else for that matter... ) the simpler a design is the better... the better you know it the easier it is to repair and maintain...

Good for you 221 (and 111) see if you can be successful making and selling these items.... more teams could experience a robot with this fun type of drive...

i am just wondering when teams or individuals will start trying to market software or programs that are designed to control different aspects of the game robot.... we constantly trade them.... but why not sell these control algorithms....??? I can tell you from experience that CONTROL of a swerve drive is much more difficult than designing one...

We had fun with our drive.... we plan on continuing to refine it and use it again if the game is such that it would be a viable drive system.

Good luck to everyone
Have a great summer!!

[Travis Hoffman]

Originally Posted by pacoliketaco

as far as i can see, swerve drive is very complex, and should only be attempted by teams with the capabilities to make one themselves.

Why?

I think perhaps you are mistakenly characterizing swerve drive technology as some kind of nectar and ambrosia that only the elite gods among FIRST teams are permitted to consume.

If so, consider Team 221's gesture to be akin to Prometheus "stealing" fire from the gods and sharing it with humanity for the benefit and education of all *lesser-equipped* mankind.

I'm pretty sure I've seen a few pics this year of teams with more "pedestrian" resources who pulled off some form of swerve successfully. It is not necessary to think that advanced robot features are off limits to all but those who are characterized as the "gods of FIRST". You can become your own "gods of swerve", if you try!

FIRST is about learning, not buying pre-built modules from other teams.

Team 221 LLC is not a "team" per se. It is a legal COTS business source of parts per the FRC rules as we know them, just like AndyMark.

48 used to fabricate our own custom transmissions. I know we've learned much and gained MUCH TIME by first studying, then understanding, and finally integrating AM's COTS transmissions into our robot, as using these components has allowed us more time to develop knowledge and capability with other robot mechanisms. Even if these 221 swerve modules WERE a simple "drag, drop, and swerve" product, which they aren't, a team would still gain a ton of extra time to pursue the learning of *other* still-unfamiliar robot systems.

my team has always had extremely limited machining capabilities (hacksaws, hand held drills, and maybe a circular saw to cut 8020) but we still manage to make effective robots. this makes me very jealous when a team comes out and says "look at our brand new CNC mill"

It is commendable that your team has been able to succeed with limited access to more high-end resources, but with the availability of these modules, perhaps you no longer have to be jealous of those "CNC" folks - perhaps having one or more of these in your possession will help you better understand swerve concepts and find ways to fabricate a working swerve system using the resources at your disposal? You can learn to both appreciate AND effectively integrate high quality, precision-fabricated technology into your robot WITHOUT access to a CNC. Who needs those $35,000+ contraptions, anyway?

maybe if you were willing to teach other teams how to, but not to actually make the parts for them.

in addition to selling them as a business venture, they also offer up their product designs freely, which I think is plenty of a head start for teams who elect not to buy their product to try and learn how to design and build the modules on their own. I'd bet they'd also answer any questions people have as they attempt to pursue their initial swerve prototypes.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

Pride cometh before the fall. If you think for one second that if 330 were building a swerve drive and needed help and they had access to one of 111's old robots they wouldn't peek under the tie-dye you are hopelessly mistake (330 was used as an example I have no affiliation nor can I be 100% sure I am correct, please take this as it was intended and don't be offended. Thank You)

No offense taken. (Also note that we have yet to do a true swerve...) And yes, we'd do our homework, also known as looking at the various swerve designs out there and seeing what's good, what's not, asking why it was done this way instead of that way, etc.

And as long as the rules don't preclude the use of a pre-built swerve module, I don't care who makes it and/or sells it.