pic: Swerve again, for fun

[asid61]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

I don't think theoretical weights are fair to compare. If the system isn't made and working, it doesn't matter how light it is.

I could go design a 4 lb swerve now, no guarantee it will work or hold up. Many of the recent designs posted aren't robust enough to survive a season (I think Aren's here would though, as he's fielded 5+ swerves at this point I think).

We're looking at a theoretical model right now, so it makes sense to compare theoretical weights. Kevin's theoretical weight for his shifting design posted a few months ago was ~7lbs IIRC, whereas Bryce's models for shifting designs weighed around 6.3lbs. Even if it wouldn't survive a season as in the CAD, there's at least 0.5lbs to play with to buff it up. And Kevin's design used only small steel miter gears, whereas this design uses much larger steel bevel gears.
Given that, I think it's possible that this weighs more than many designs posted previously. However, it is much more compact, and for many situations that can be more valued than the weight.

If you believed that none of the recent designs can survive the season, then you really should have said so ealier, when those designs were posted.

Also, I found this yesterday:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/34178
So Aren beat himself some years ago.

EDIT: How is the bevel gear constrained axially on the shaft? Does it depend on the wheel to position itself properly?

[Gdeaver]

This years game was hard on our swerve modules but they are still going strong. I would pick a robust module over a cute light weight module any day. So I say to those who have caded all those modules in the off season, Make them and beat them. Do they perform and survive? Then it is a good design. Until then it's just a concept. We made a CVT module this off season. Do we do it this year? I don't know. I'm leery of adding complexity to an already complex system. I guess it depends on the game. But, we made it and tested it. Made revisions and beat it. First has become brutal. Will 2015 continue this trend?

[Kevin Ainsworth]

Originally Posted by asid61

We're looking at a theoretical model right now, so it makes sense to compare theoretical weights. Kevin's theoretical weight for his shifting design posted a few months ago was ~7lbs IIRC, whereas Bryce's models for shifting designs weighed around 6.3lbs. Even if it wouldn't survive a season as in the CAD, there's at least 0.5lbs to play with to buff it up. And Kevin's design used only small steel miter gears, whereas this design uses much larger steel bevel gears.
Given that, I think it's possible that this weighs more than many designs posted previously. However, it is much more compact, and for many situations that can be more valued than the weight.

If you believed that none of the recent designs can survive the season, then you really should have said so ealier, when those designs were posted.

Also, I found this yesterday:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/34178
So Aren beat himself some years ago.

EDIT: How is the bevel gear constrained axially on the shaft? Does it depend on the wheel to position itself properly?

The larger gear in Aren's design might be larger but the smaller gear is much smaller. I would go off tooth size and not OD of the largest gear.

Our actual module weighs in at 7.5 lbs with no additional lightening of the gears, etc. This is too be expected since all the steel screws weren't added to the CAD model. We'll post a video of it driving around just as soon as it is, should have it powered up this afternoon.

[asid61]

Originally Posted by Kevin Ainsworth

The larger gear in Aren's design might be larger but the smaller gear is much smaller. I would go off tooth size and not OD of the largest gear.

Our actual module weighs in at 7.5 lbs with no additional lightening of the gears, etc. This is too be expected since all the steel screws weren't added to the CAD model. We'll post a video of it driving around just as soon as it is, should have it powered up this afternoon.

The smaller gear is probably 15t or 18t compared to the 20/40 combo I use in my modules, but I don't know for sure. I tend to use 1 module gears (about 24 pitch) for my stuff.
The weight comes not only from the teeth but the face of the gear I think, as well as the hub. As the diameter of the gear increases the area/ volume of the gear increases considerably.

You actually made your module? Super cool! I'll be looking forward to seeing it driving.

[Kyler Hagler]

Great looking swerve Aren!

When you get it working Kevin, it would be awesome to see a video of it working!

[Dillon Carey]

Originally Posted by asid61

Also, I found this yesterday:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/34178
So Aren beat himself some years ago.

Not everything that 1625 has ever done was designed by Aren, many things were, but his senior year on our team was 2008. He helped out up till about 2011, he moved on to help 3928 and 148 after. He did a lot for our team, but their were (and are) a lot of talented people who deserve credit for 1625s success.

Example: I led the design on this module as well as the 2010 6 wheel swerve.

[Aren_Hill]

Originally Posted by Dillon Carey

Not everything that 1625 has ever done was designed by Aren, many things were, but his senior year on our team was 2008. He helped out up till about 2011, he moved on to help 3928 and 148 after. He did a lot for our team, but their were (and are) a lot of talented people who deserve credit for 1625s success.

Example: I led the design on this module as well as the 2010 6 wheel swerve.

^Dillon is the guy who did half the stuff I get credit for, cause Internet.

(And if I made that tiny module, the lightening pattern would've been way cooler looking )

[asid61]

Originally Posted by Dillon Carey

Not everything that 1625 has ever done was designed by Aren, many things were, but his senior year on our team was 2008. He helped out up till about 2011, he moved on to help 3928 and 148 after. He did a lot for our team, but their were (and are) a lot of talented people who deserve credit for 1625s success.

Example: I led the design on this module as well as the 2010 6 wheel swerve.

OMG I'm so sorry. I didn't double check the author.
How did 6 wheel swerve work out?

[pwnageNick]

Originally Posted by asid61

OMG I'm so sorry. I didn't double check the author.
How did 6 wheel swerve work out?

Went to Einstein allied with 2056 and 3138

also:

Finalists at GKC along with Engineering Excellence,

Semi-Finalists at Midwest along with Regional Chairman's

Galileo Division Champions

Never ranked lower than 3rd after quals at any regional or champs, overall season record of 36-13-1

sooooooo...

*Fun fact, only 6-Wheel Swerve to ever be on Einstein

[Chris is me]

Aren never ceases to break my head with his designs. The non-coaxial power transfer is so cool. I like how you use the 16-style bearing thing to avoid using any shafting at all holding the module up. I like how your crazy ideas make complete sense in terms of the problems you're trying to solve.

It doesn't look like you have any sensor feedback on the wheel (velocity, you have a thing for angle i think). Do you have something planned for that? This seems like a cool application for that on-CIM encoder that's been going around CD these days.

If you believed that none of the recent designs can survive the season, then you really should have said so ealier, when those designs were posted.

He's not objecting to the designs, he's objecting to comparing the weight of untested CAD models. He had no reason to make this point until this happened, so I don't think it's a fair criticism.

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

He's not objecting to the designs, he's objecting to comparing the weight of untested CAD models. He had no reason to make this point until this happened, so I don't think it's a fair criticism.

Eh... I was complaining about the designs too. Too much focus on flash and pocketing, not enough focus on functionality and practicality.

Good design is focusing on eliminating items before pocketing them. Design for manufacture is key.

I didn't comment as I've learned to avoid (or try to...) providing criticism to people in that stage, as they generally don't listen to it anyway.

[Aren_Hill]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

Aren never ceases to break my head with his designs. The non-coaxial power transfer is so cool. I like how you use the 16-style bearing thing to avoid using any shafting at all holding the module up. I like how your crazy ideas make complete sense in terms of the problems you're trying to solve.

It doesn't look like you have any sensor feedback on the wheel (velocity, you have a thing for angle i think). Do you have something planned for that? This seems like a cool application for that on-CIM encoder that's been going around CD these days.

The power transfer is still technically Coax, just pseudo planetary coax...

The module support is a 1/4" section silverthin bearing, the forks that hold the main wheel dead axle overlap the inner race of the bearing and clamp it. This is what handles the weight of the robot. No more custom bearing 16 style stuff, just a big COTS X-contact awesome bearing.

And that was my first thought after seeing that nifty CIM-encoder setup Chris, it'd work quite well as I currently have to cut the CIM shaft anyway.

This is by far the "most legitimate" swerve I have designed, and no pocketing etc has been done, I am confident it would last through a season and then some, while still being easy to work on.
Fun Fact, it only has 1 nut on it, and I could remove that one as well if I really wanted to. (Wheel dead axle)

-Aren