|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Team 935's Chassis
Why did you CNC so much? I only ask because to me it would make more sense to build a separate upper frame instead of extending the CNC so high up.
|
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: pic: Team 935's Chassis
Quote:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/34715 Their triangular pattern is very strong. Even with pocketing, the pattern plus the fact that it is quarter-inch 6061 allows their frame to be very rigid and strong. It will not "crumple." Last edited by Akash Rastogi : 18-02-2010 at 00:13. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: pic: Team 935's Chassis
well, wouldn't it make more sense to make it out of one part instead of having multiple parts that could break, and have to be made with close enough tolerances to fit together.
|
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Team 935's Chassis
In SOME things that is true, but a whole robot? If this frame got hit hard (which it will), there is a good chance that it would bend. You cant replace a bent part of a robot that is one giant piece. Unless you have infinite quantities of those plates! And besides, building the robot with good ol' nuts and bolts is fun!
|
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: pic: Team 935's Chassis
Quote:
|
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Team 935's Chassis
Quote:
|
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: pic: Team 935's Chassis
Quote:
Quote:
Condescending tones don't sound that great when discussing teams' designs by the way. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| pic: Team 223 Chassis | jjjeski | Extra Discussion | 26 | 17-02-2010 23:53 |
| Pic: Team 935's nearly complete chassis | railerobotics | Robot Showcase | 44 | 20-02-2008 12:11 |
| pic: Team 1058 chassis | PVCMike | Extra Discussion | 3 | 30-01-2007 22:28 |
| pic: Team 27 2004 Chassis | CD47-Bot | Robot Showcase | 2 | 25-02-2004 23:29 |
| pic: Team 369 Chassis | CD47-Bot | Robot Showcase | 7 | 11-02-2004 19:58 |