pic: Anyone remember these?

[Duncan Macdonald]

Can't wait to see it in action.

Wouldn't be too concerned about the electronics. The cRio can take a 50 g shock.

http://www.firstwiki.net/index.php/R...ler_%282009%29 (Under Key Features)

[DonRotolo]

To meet that 50g shock, the wires to the power connector need some ferrules. Cheap & easy, thankfully. Bare wires are less robust.

[jason701802]

The type of drivetrain would have almost nothing to do the robots ability to get air, that has a lot more to do with the shape of the bot and the speed it can attain. If you geared one of those to get air off the bump, you would be geared so high that you would be able to be pushed around my almost anybody.

One thing i can tell you from experience with those tracks is that even a small amount of pressure from the side would completely lock up the system and leave the bot immobile (and by this years rules, that wouldn't count as pinning). They also eat up the available weight pretty quickly, unless they have been significantly redesigned, (and the only thing that looks different to me is the gearbox) a pair of those easily weigh 60-80 pounds, without any electronics.

Another thing to remember is that the force of friction is based only on the coefficient of friction and the mass of the bot, not the surface area.

Yes, this is someone from team of the original creators and users of this drive system.

Originally Posted by jason701802

The type of drivetrain would have almost nothing to do the robots ability to get air, that has a lot more to do with the shape of the bot and the speed it can attain. If you geared one of those to get air off the bump, you would be geared so high that you would be able to be pushed around my almost anybody.

Incorrect. The gearing has little to do with catching air. It's the large contact patch that the belt provides that allows little to no deceleration when driving over the ramp. The system is currently geared around 9-10 fps depending on battery level, which you should know is plenty of pushing power with this system.

One thing i can tell you from experience with those tracks is that even a small amount of pressure from the side would completely lock up the system and leave the bot immobile (and by this years rules, that wouldn't count as pinning).

The older version had this flaw, yes. It's been fixed in the newer models.

They also eat up the available weight pretty quickly, unless they have been significantly redesigned, (and the only thing that looks different to me is the gearbox) a pair of those easily weigh 60-80 pounds, without any electronics.

Current projected weight for the robot sits at 85 pounds, with all electronics, motors, and so on. Your large weight in the past was caused by inefficient mounting of the track boxes.

Another thing to remember is that the force of friction is based only on the coefficient of friction and the mass of the bot, not the surface area.

Yes, this is someone from team of the original creators and users of this drive system.

Yes, of course. The larger surface area aids in climbing, and climbing only. Without added idlers, the system is effectively a six wheel system. Once climbing, the belt between idlers allows the system to outclimb most other systems. During pushing matches, the low rolling resistance and high efficiency makes this system very attractive.

[jason701802]

Originally Posted by CraigHickman

Incorrect. The gearing has little to do with catching air. It's the large contact patch that the belt provides that allows little to no deceleration when driving over the ramp.

I fail to see how the size of the contact patch has anything to do with the ability to catch air. Bases on what i have learned in physics, the velocity (kinetic energy) of the robot would have the greatest effect on the robots ability to get catch air.

Originally Posted by CraigHickman

The system is currently geared around 9-10 fps depending on battery level, which you should know is plenty of pushing power with this system.

When we ran that system, we ran it at around 6-8 fps (and yes we had 4 CIMs) and there were a few robots that could push us around, gearing up the system anymore would would only increase the number of robots that could this system around.

Originally Posted by CraigHickman

The older version had this flaw, yes. It's been fixed in the newer models.

I am very interested in what has been done to fix this problem, it originates from the track being pushed against and out of its groove, increasing the friction to far greater than the motors can overcome. There are no visible changes to the design that would help to overcome this problem.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by CraigHickman

During pushing matches, the low rolling resistance and high efficiency makes this system very attractive.

High efficiency? Treads are notoriously inefficient. There's no way that an Outback tread system can even match a well constructed kitbot in efficiency.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by Cory

High efficiency? Treads are notoriously inefficient. There's no way that an Outback tread system can even match a well constructed kitbot in efficiency.

While trying to turn don't tread systems stall the motors?

[thefro526]

Craig, when you first told me you were going with a tank treaded drivetrain this year I had my doubts but, you've made me a believer.

I want 3.

[Andy L]

I think I remember them... yeah, they were in our shop an hour ago!

Jason, after seeing them, I'm pretty sure Craig is right that they fixed the tread being pushed out of the grooves

Outback has been an amazing shop to work with so far for us, we'll probably be going to them more and more in upcoming years

Originally Posted by Andy L

I think I remember them... yeah, they were in our shop an hour ago!

Jason, after seeing them, I'm pretty sure Craig is right that they fixed the tread being pushed out of the grooves

Outback has been an amazing shop to work with so far for us, we'll probably be going to them more and more in upcoming years

And they'll be in my shop pretty soon!