Universal/Standard Drive Base

[Dennis Jenks]

Originally Posted by CraigHickman

If you'll use the handy-dandy search feature, you'll see that it's been tried, and fallen flat each time.

I don't know about that..........some would say that 254 has done ok since standardizing their drivetrain in 2004.

[Josh Fox]

Originally Posted by Dennis Jenks

I don't know about that..........some would say that 254 has done ok since standardizing their drivetrain in 2004.

I, and anyone who knows anything about the Cheesy Poofs, would have to agree with this. While this year they may have had 8 wheels instead of the usual 6 typical of the "West-Coast Drive," there's nothing radically different from year to year from what I have seen.

While the chassis doesn't necessarily make or break a robot, I think there's something to be said about using a somewhat simpler design that's perhaps weaker in comparison to other designs, and instead using those resources, i.e. manpower and time, to focus on other challenges.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by Josh Fox

While the chassis doesn't necessarily make or break a robot, I think there's something to be said about using a somewhat simpler design that's perhaps weaker in comparison to other designs, and instead using those resources, i.e. manpower and time, to focus on other challenges.

<threadjack>
I agree with your final conclusion that time can be spent elsewhere but NOT on the reasoning. A good drive train is critical to having a successful season. It will make or break your season.
</threadjack>

When doing your research for this SDB please consider multiple options rather than just copying 254. For example, weight the benefits and costs of sheet metal, fiberglass, wood, steel, welded tube, etc. Weight the benefits and costs of cantilevered wheels. Shifting vs One Speed. 6wd, 8wd, 10wd, 14wd. Also, share your research. Publish a white paper on why you chose one method over the other.

Originally Posted by Dennis Jenks

I don't know about that..........some would say that 254 has done ok since standardizing their drivetrain in 2004.

It was my interpretation that this would be a larger effort than a single team, and thus that it was similar to the "open source" bases that have been tried in the past.

Simply standardizing a style of drive base inside of a team is relatively simple and effective, and if that's the direction this is going, good luck and I hope the results for your team are as potent as others.

[NickE]

Originally Posted by Dennis Jenks

I don't know about that..........some would say that 254 has done ok since standardizing their drivetrain in 2004.

Although we have used extremely similar drivebases each of the past seven years, we don't go into the build season restricting ourselves to just one style. Although the style of manufacture will probably stay the same (because that is what we can build easily), the drivetrain design could change drastically.

For example, in 2009, we spent weeks deliberating on whether to build a long or wide robot. Eventually, we decided on long not because it was what we had done before, but because we believed it allowed us to optimize our superstructure. In retrospect, that may have not been the right decision, but that is a debate for another day.