Go to Post Do not treat Vex and FLL as inferior because they may not get as much exposure as FRC on these boards. Just remember, FLL has seven times more teams than FRC from twenty additional countries. - artdutra04 [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

 
 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #27   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-07-2013, 18:32
AdamHeard's Avatar
AdamHeard AdamHeard is offline
Lead Mentor
FRC #0973 (Greybots)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Atascadero
Posts: 5,494
AdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to AdamHeard
Re: pic: 20's IRI Carnage

Quote:
Originally Posted by Travis Covington View Post
I think Cory forgot that we actually did break 2-4 of these on our practice bot this year in a similar manner. They were also from WCP but modified to be 1" OD. We had run the same size dog since 2007 without failures, so I am pretty confident that the changes implemented in the WCP ones, along with the additional CIM motor (we had 3 per gearbox) caused the failures for us.

In the past, we had either used a #3-48 screw (which failed a few times) or a 3/32" roll pin (which never failed). I believe the larger diameter hole of the #4-40, as well as the inherent stress risers that exist with there being a thread, combined with the additional torque of our 3 motor gearbox caused our failures. As some have mentioned, the cyclical/shock loads that this part sees are very high, and the relatively thin cross section at that threaded side of the dog does not provide much, if any, factor of safety.

We lucked out because we never had a failure on the competition bot, but did have drilled (non-threaded) dogs as backup. Our kids got plenty of practice and were able to swap a broken dog in under an hour if they had to. I am glad we never had to do that between matches though!

I think for the future we will use non-threaded dogs, as well as possibly increasing the thickness of that section of the dog at the expense of an ever so slightly wider gearbox.

Adam may be able to provide more insight in to their circumstances, but I think 973 may have just lucked out on not breaking their parts considering they had very similar loading characteristics to us. It may have had something to do with the CG of their robot versus ours, and the way it decelerates, but might also be because their dogs are the standard 1.125" OD (I believe?). We broke almost all of our dogs when stopping or changing directions, or when going fast over bumps/metal plates under the carpeting in our lab. Given the failure, those loading conditions make sense.

Hope this helps!

Edit: On second thought, 973's larger plastic wheels might have dampened some of the shock-loading as well. Who knows.
We actually didn't shift this year. The highest loading we've put on dogs was 2011 w/ 4 cims and 2 775s. They were the full 1.125" diameter though.
Reply With Quote
 


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


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 00:05.

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