Go to Post Tom didn't need the t-shirt to tell us [that he is a NERD] :D - Peter Matteson [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > ChiefDelphi.com Website > Extra Discussion
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-08-2009, 09:38
joeweber's Avatar
joeweber joeweber is offline
Coach team 1322
FRC #1322 (G.R.A.Y.T. Leviathons)
Team Role: Coach
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Fenton, Michigan
Posts: 339
joeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant future
Re: pic: 1010 Drive system prototype

Thanks for the response, this system does use ball differentials where the two drive chains come together. The video and system can be viewed at http://www.team1322.org/ideas.htm . I would never use the 10 wheel design but I do like the discussion on this and how traction can be view by different people. I have heard many views on traction and multiple wheel designs. The addition of the extra wheels just popped into my mind and though I would see how it would look on paper and wanted to share. I find it interesting trying to come up with a omni direction robot that is simple to build and has an effective pushing force. Swerve drive is complex and Mecanum is simple but less traction. Maybe somebody will come up with a solution some day.
__________________
If your not dirty than you must be just watching.
Thank's to http://weberelectric.biz/

FRC Team sitehttp://team1322.org/
2004 Great Lakes Xerox Creativity Award, 2008 Web Site Excellence Award, 2010 Kettering District and Western Michigan District Excellence in Engineering award, 2011 Kettering District Gracious Professionalism Award. 2011 Ann Arbor and State Cooperation Awards.2013 Kettering Xeroc Creativity Award.2015 Escanaba Chairman's Award.2015 Kettering Spirit Award.2016 Kettering Chairman's Award
FTC Lightining Boltz 5954, Thunder Botz 7032http://team1322.org/vex.htm
Reply With Quote
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-08-2009, 10:46
Bryan Herbst's Avatar
Bryan Herbst Bryan Herbst is offline
Registered User
AKA: Bryan
FRC #2052 (KnightKrawler)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Posts: 544
Bryan Herbst has a reputation beyond reputeBryan Herbst has a reputation beyond reputeBryan Herbst has a reputation beyond reputeBryan Herbst has a reputation beyond reputeBryan Herbst has a reputation beyond reputeBryan Herbst has a reputation beyond reputeBryan Herbst has a reputation beyond reputeBryan Herbst has a reputation beyond reputeBryan Herbst has a reputation beyond reputeBryan Herbst has a reputation beyond reputeBryan Herbst has a reputation beyond repute
Re: pic: 1010 Drive system prototype

I guess everyone else has beaten the "too many wheel" horse beyond death,m though I do agree.

Not sure if you were aware or not, but those mechanums are also not set up properly. The wheels should not all be oriented the same direction, but in an "x" shape.
__________________
Team 2052- Knightkrawler
Mentor and volunteer
Reply With Quote
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-08-2009, 11:31
joeweber's Avatar
joeweber joeweber is offline
Coach team 1322
FRC #1322 (G.R.A.Y.T. Leviathons)
Team Role: Coach
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Fenton, Michigan
Posts: 339
joeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant futurejoeweber has a brilliant future
Re: pic: 1010 Drive system prototype

Not sure if you were aware or not, but those mechanums are also not set up properly. The wheels should not all be oriented the same direction, but in an "x" shape.
Today 09:38 AM

Yeah I'm aware I just don't feel like a redraw. If You watch our vidio the prototype is correct. http://www.team1322.org/ideas.htm

Maybee we should get away from wheels and make running and jumping robots.
__________________
If your not dirty than you must be just watching.
Thank's to http://weberelectric.biz/

FRC Team sitehttp://team1322.org/
2004 Great Lakes Xerox Creativity Award, 2008 Web Site Excellence Award, 2010 Kettering District and Western Michigan District Excellence in Engineering award, 2011 Kettering District Gracious Professionalism Award. 2011 Ann Arbor and State Cooperation Awards.2013 Kettering Xeroc Creativity Award.2015 Escanaba Chairman's Award.2015 Kettering Spirit Award.2016 Kettering Chairman's Award
FTC Lightining Boltz 5954, Thunder Botz 7032http://team1322.org/vex.htm
Reply With Quote
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-08-2009, 13:17
JesseK's Avatar
JesseK JesseK is online now
Expert Flybot Crasher
FRC #1885 (ILITE)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Reston, VA
Posts: 3,640
JesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond repute
Re: pic: 1010 Drive system prototype

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeweber View Post
...
I find it interesting trying to come up with a omni direction robot that is simple to build and has an effective pushing force. Swerve drive is complex and Mecanum is simple but less traction. Maybe somebody will come up with a solution some day.
Just thought about something after reading a couple of posts. In the few instances where the robot is trying to move forward, the middle omni wheels would essentially give the drive train 100% torque moving forward, and 71% torque moving sideways.

384 & 1086 seemed to have massively powerful mecanums in 2007 & 2008, and what I've gathered from them is it's all about gearing and how you try to push 'bots around. If your bot is square to the bot you're trying to push, so long as your bot is geared properly there shouldn't be a problem in pushing the other bot. Traction (as defined by the ability to convert torque into forward movement, which takes the roller angle into account)) is still a matter of what the rubber rollers are made out of and not the angle of the rollers.

Furthermore (and I just had this thought....), if your bot tries to push on the diagonal, (which should have the code only driving two motors at full speed), you only have 0.5 * 0.71 = 35% of the available total torque with the other two wheels acting as castors. This situation is probably where most people get their eye-witness accounts of 'mecanums can't push'.
__________________

Drive Coach, 1885 (2007-present)
CAD Library Updated 5/1/16 - 2016 Curie/Carver Industrial Design Winner
GitHub
Reply With Quote
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-08-2009, 13:45
Lil' Lavery Lil' Lavery is offline
TSIMFD
AKA: Sean Lavery
FRC #1712 (DAWGMA)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,602
Lil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Lil' Lavery
Re: pic: 1010 Drive system prototype

Quote:
Originally Posted by JesseK View Post
1.) More wheels can support more weight and still have omni-movement in a non-FRC application

2.) More wheels = more traction in a dynamic environment where actual amount of surface contact is unpredictable. Why? More wheels = higher probability that you will get a better mate of carpet and rubber at any given contact point. Tonight I'll try to find the link where some Japanese researchers showed this relationship when determining tread design for shoes that wouldn't slip when going up/down carpeted stairs. Essentially, the shorter the carpet and finer the threads the less this is an issue but it could explain the anecdotal evidence some teams claim they've seen.
I was viewing this through the limited lens of FRC, and there are situations where having more wheels/greater contact area could improve traction. In an FRC game (at least like every one we've seen so far), the benefit would be minimal in terms of traction, and quite possibly harmful in terms of "pushing power."

A middle set of driven wheels could be beneficial for tasks such as a ramp and stair climbing, but on a planar surface I question the advantage it gives.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JesseK View Post
Just thought about something after reading a couple of posts. In the few instances where the robot is trying to move forward, the middle omni wheels would essentially give the drive train 100% torque moving forward, and 71% torque moving sideways.
Assuming equal coefficients of friction and even weight distribution (neither of which are likely to be true in the real world), wouldn't forward/backward motion actually utilize 88.4% of the total torque? The three sets of omni-wheels would have a total of 60% of the weight and (theoretically) 100% efficiency in that direction, while the mecanums would hold 40% of the weight and have 71% efficiency.
In perpendicular (strafing) motion, it would (theoretically) have only 28.4% of the total torque, as the omni-wheels (which hold 60% of the bots weight) are only acting in the forward/reverse direction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JesseK View Post
Furthermore (and I just had this thought....), if your bot tries to push on the diagonal, (which should have the code only driving two motors at full speed), you only have 0.5 * 0.71 = 35% of the available total torque with the other two wheels acting as castors. This situation is probably where most people get their eye-witness accounts of 'mecanums can't push'.
On a standard mecanum you'll have 50% of total torque. 2 wheels operating at 100%, and 2 wheels operating at 0% (casters).
In this drive (once again assuming equal coefficients of friction and even weight distribution), 20% of the robots weight will be acting at 100% (driven mecanums), 40% will be operating at 71% (four driven omni-wheels operating at 45º), and 40% will be operating at 0% (undriven omnis and mecanums). That theoretically means you're effectively using 48.4% of your torque. Or just under what a standard mecanum would be using.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JesseK View Post
384 & 1086 seemed to have massively powerful mecanums in 2007 & 2008, and what I've gathered from them is it's all about gearing and how you try to push 'bots around. If your bot is square to the bot you're trying to push, so long as your bot is geared properly there shouldn't be a problem in pushing the other bot. Traction (as defined by the ability to convert torque into forward movement, which takes the roller angle into account)) is still a matter of what the rubber rollers are made out of and not the angle of the rollers.
I think you've hit a good note, though from a slightly different perspective. In general, I've found, that a robots anecdotal "pushing power" has every bit as much, if not more, to do with how it's driven than the mechanical features of the bot. Many of the 8-wheel defensive monsters out there seem to have more pushing power than a 4-wheeled bot because they drive more aggressively, and actively use their momentum and defensive driving techniques to their advantage.
__________________
Being correct doesn't mean you don't have to explain yourself.
Reply With Quote
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-08-2009, 15:06
EricH's Avatar
EricH EricH is offline
New year, new team
FRC #1197 (Torbots)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 19,755
EricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond repute
Re: pic: 1010 Drive system prototype

Remembering the previously posted sketches/pictures of the prototype, this drivetrain is rigged for keeping mecanum capability on ramps, as one end hinges. (Note: the hinge is right around the center axle). Doubles as suspension, too.

Now, here's the question: Are those axles running across the width of the robot? If so, is there any particular reason for them? I can see that one is rigged for rotational motion up and down, but not the other--was that just "I'm too lazy" or simply the way it's designed?
__________________
Past teams:
2003-2007: FRC0330 BeachBots
2008: FRC1135 Shmoebotics
2012: FRC4046 Schroedinger's Dragons

"Rockets are tricky..."--Elon Musk

Reply With Quote
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-08-2009, 15:28
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: 3,077
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: pic: 1010 Drive system prototype

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH View Post
Remembering the previously posted sketches/pictures of the prototype, this drivetrain is rigged for keeping mecanum capability on ramps, as one end hinges. (Note: the hinge is right around the center axle). Doubles as suspension, too.

Now, here's the question: Are those axles running across the width of the robot? If so, is there any particular reason for them? I can see that one is rigged for rotational motion up and down, but not the other--was that just "I'm too lazy" or simply the way it's designed?
I believe that the axles running the width of the robot serve to link together the ball differentials of the 2nd and 4th wheels on each side. The result is that these wheels receive the "average" power of the two front or two rear motors. Thus when strafing, the 2nd and 4th wheels do not turn.
Reply With Quote
Reply


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
pic: 1885's Drive Train Prototype JesseK Extra Discussion 5 01-02-2009 02:11
pic: Crab Drive Prototype Weekend Build Alex698 Extra Discussion 9 13-01-2009 20:42
pic: A closup view of our prototype worm-crab drive system. AndyB Extra Discussion 6 20-01-2008 00:02
pic: 213 - Drive prototype teaser Tyler M. Robot Showcase 10 07-01-2007 20:56
pic: Team 610 Off-Season Tank Drive Prototype Jonathan Norris Extra Discussion 14 06-11-2006 01:59


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:47.

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