pic: 6WD Chassis

[Rion Atkinson]

loading photo ...

[Jared Russell]

1) Great job! Thanks for sharing.

2) You could probably eliminate some of those vertical supports and still have sufficient frame rigidity.

3) 59 lbs sounds a little heavy for what is pictured (are you including the battery in this weight?). What kind of material, e.g. wall thickness, is your structural tubing?

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by Jared341

1) Great job! Thanks for sharing.

2) You could probably eliminate some of those vertical supports and still have sufficient frame rigidity.

3) 59 lbs sounds a little heavy for what is pictured (are you including the battery in this weight?). What kind of material, e.g. wall thickness, is your structural tubing?

The vertical supports in the rear of the frame can be reduced/ be placed in larger increments depending on what goes on top. Also, based on the game, you'd always have the chance of removing the front cross rail and replacing it with an opening.

EricH suggested 1/8" wall tubing, but this was when Rion had a single tier frame (no vertical supports and no top half) so would 1/16" wall be sufficient in this two tier frame?(vertical supports with top half)

[Rion Atkinson]

Originally Posted by Jared341

2) You could probably eliminate some of those vertical supports and still have sufficient frame rigidity.

3) 59 lbs sounds a little heavy for what is pictured (are you including the battery in this weight?). What kind of material, e.g. wall thickness, is your structural tubing?

Thanks for the supports advice. I will definitely pull some out.


Ya.. i was thinking it was a little heavy... Yes the battery is included. The wood board... Inventor thinks that is Aluminum 6061, I can't find a wood option and it was originally going to be that.

The frame is made of 1" extruded aluminum(sides are 1/8").

[Tom Line]

You're going for the wide chassis footprint rather than the narrow.

You don't need 6 wheels to rocker a wide chassis - it turns fairly well with 4.

[sanddrag]

I would definitely keep 1/8" wall for the outside perimeter, and I would question the need for that upper deck. I like the battery box. You may consider flipping the battery around, and putting a mounting tab to hard mount the Anderson Powerpole connector to the box.

Originally Posted by Tom Line

You don't need 6 wheels to rocker a wide chassis - it turns fairly well with 4.

Having the middle wheel could be useful for games with ramps, such as 2006. 696 did a design similar to this, and it allowed them to use 3.5" wheels and have only 3/16" ground clearance, and still negotiate the ramp without high centering.

[Rion Atkinson]

Originally Posted by Tom Line

You're going for the wide chassis footprint rather than the narrow.

Actually. I will be designing a narrow as well. I figured I would "perfect", so to speak, the wide chassis first.

Originally Posted by sanddrag

I would definitely keep 1/8" wall for the outside perimeter, and I would question the need for that upper deck.

The upper deck is actually what I used to mount the AM SS....

[BrendanB]

One suggestion, I wouldn't have the C'rio up against the front in case you get a hard it. It happens a lot. I don't think any team wants to have the most expensive piece of there robot be destroyed.

[Dillon Carey]

What is the indent in the front for?

[Rion Atkinson]

Originally Posted by Dillon Carey

What is the indent in the front for?

Nothing really.. I could move it forward, but there is really no need.. Save weight! (Even if only around .5 lbs...)

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by BrendanB

One suggestion, I wouldn't have the C'rio up against the front in case you get a hard it. It happens a lot. I don't think any team wants to have the most expensive piece of there robot be destroyed.

Actually, many teams mounted their cRIO that way and even perpendicular to the ground. Even without zipties, I don't think any team had loose modules or a broken cRIO. It can take impacts pretty well.

[Dillon Carey]

Originally Posted by Formerly Famous

Nothing really.. I could move it forward, but there is really no need.. Save weight! (Even if only around .5 lbs...)

Ok, i was thinking you were trying to plan ahead for some sort of pick up system.

[Taylor]

I assume the tabs along the sides are for bumper attachment. Given the limited hand space there, are you thinking cotter pins through bolts to hold them on?

[kramarczyk]

Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi

Actually, many teams mounted their cRIO that way and even perpendicular to the ground. Even without zipties, I don't think any team had loose modules or a broken cRIO. It can take impacts pretty well.

Yeah, the cRio has been known to take a beating.
http://decibel.ni.com/content/docs/DOC-6176

Originally Posted by Taylor

I assume the tabs along the sides are for bumper attachment. Given the limited hand space there, are you thinking cotter pins through bolts to hold them on?

We used some quick release pins from McMaster-Carr (p/n 98320A140) on two robots this year. No bottom access required. We had zero perfomance issues and zero inspection issues (some of the inspectors actually liked them).

[AndyB]

Originally Posted by kramarczyk

Yeah, the cRio has been known to take a beating.
http://decibel.ni.com/content/docs/DOC-6176

Very interesting. I knew the cRio could take a hit, but that's unbelievable.

I would have no concerns about moving your cRio. Just make sure it's easy to access.

You'd be safe using 50 lb/ft^3 density for your wood panel. Aluminum is about 3 times that (I just looked up the densities for for particle board and 6061 aluminum for these numbers). http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/wo...sity-d_40.html has a list of densities for various types of wood.