pic: Swerve Module Concept (View 1)

What wheels are you planning to use on this design? It looks like you'd be able to thin it down (and use less power while steering the modules) is you used Colson wheels... But switching your wheel choice means examining design priority: Do you want to push, or out maneuver? Crab makes a robot able to run circles around many other robots, but depending on ratios and wheel type, can also be a decent pushing bot.

I'd love to see the rest of your chassis for this design, it looks quite solid.

[Dave McLaughlin]

Daniel,

I appreciate the concern and the suggestions. I completely understand that you're not picking on my poor little module I have considered adding a ring like you suggested. Possibly out of delrin or something of the like. It seems like there is a definite divide on Delphi between the 111 style and the 118 style module.

From what I have seen on Delphi and in person, there are numerous swerves without support rings that have worked just fine. I'm planning on CADing up a version with the ring to see how I would have to alter the frame and module to make it work, but I find that I am of the persuasion that prefers the no-ring approach. I would like to here more about the pros and cons off adding a ring if you would humor me with the discussion...

Craig,

I am using the 4" AM Traction Wheel but modifying the hub that comes with it as well as adding a custom hub to change it from a 3/4" roller bearing to a 1/2" keyed shaft. The hub I sketched up goes all the way through the wheel. I didn't want to blow spokes like I have seen happen with some swerves, so I picked the heftiest wheel I could for the cost and added as much support through the custom hub that I could.

MORE QUESTIONS PLEASE!

[sdcantrell56]

The colson wheel would be much stronger than even the andymark wheel with a hub and also have slightly less traction to place less stress on the module. You would also not have to replace tread and they are much cheaper. IMO colsons are the perfect wheel for a crab module, especially with a custom hub.

[Akash Rastogi]

I'd also go along with the suggestion for colson performa wheels. In nonswerve applications they've been our best wheel yet for defensive driving. 148's coaxcrab in 08 was also highly impressive with the wheels. This thread might help you out just a bit if you want more info on wheel selection..

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=76572

[Dave McLaughlin]

Thanks for the tip on the Colsons. They look cheap and reliable. I just started working on a version with them.

However, after looking on the "New Stuff" page on AM I think I will go with the 4" performance wheel that are coming out/came out as I would not have to make a custom hub and they appear hefty enough to stand up to the side loads that could be encountered.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by Dave McLaughlin

Daniel,

I appreciate the concern and the suggestions. I completely understand that you're not picking on my poor little module I have considered adding a ring like you suggested. Possibly out of delrin or something of the like. It seems like there is a definite divide on Delphi between the 111 style and the 118 style module.

From what I have seen on Delphi and in person, there are numerous swerves without support rings that have worked just fine. I'm planning on CADing up a version with the ring to see how I would have to alter the frame and module to make it work, but I find that I am of the persuasion that prefers the no-ring approach. I would like to here more about the pros and cons off adding a ring if you would humor me with the discussion...

Both designs have tradeoffs and their use truely depends on design intent.

Since I'm of the pro ring design, I'll put forth what I see as it's biggest pros and cons:

Pro: Less stress on the whole module -- with the ring low (near the ground) you have a significantly shorter lever arm and therefore much lower stress (see above post). This will allow you to make your side plates thinner (and lighter) while increasing their robustness.

Con: More framework. The frame must contact the module at 2 rings that are not close to each other. That means more framework and possibly a heavier chassis.


Ring designs tend to have less ground clearance as well, but with the side gear that low in your design I don't see that as much of an issue.


If anyone else would like to chime in, I'd like to hear y'alls opinion as well.

[Aren_Hill]

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

Both designs have tradeoffs and their use truely depends on design intent.

Since I'm of the pro ring design, I'll put forth what I see as it's biggest pros and cons:

Pro: Less stress on the whole module -- with the ring low (near the ground) you have a significantly shorter lever arm and therefore much lower stress (see above post). This will allow you to make your side plates thinner (and lighter) while increasing their robustness.

Con: More framework. The frame must contact the module at 2 rings that are not close to each other. That means more framework and possibly a heavier chassis.


Ring designs tend to have less ground clearance as well, but with the side gear that low in your design I don't see that as much of an issue.


If anyone else would like to chime in, I'd like to hear y'alls opinion as well.

The "ring" can be put at any height you want really so ground clearance is very tweakable.

And building a frame to go with the "ring style" using 1x1x.0625 box tubing works very well weight wise as opposed to pure top mounting which would require heftier frame members