|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#46
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Spectrum 3847 - 2017 CAD Model: Gamma Ray
This CAD looks beautiful, cant wait to see this robot on the field.
|
|
#47
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Spectrum 3847 - 2017 CAD Model: Gamma Ray
Quote:
Considering even a full length robot can actuate their front roller so that it occupies the space between the frame and the edge of the bumper, this advantage starts to seem limited to making the collector wider. Again, this is a sizeable advantage, but at the same time, the field will have hundreds of balls on it, and I'm not sure the complexity of this solution is justified for this benefit. It's not zero benefit, and it's certainly worth exploring for many teams, I just wonder if the tradeoff in complexity and / or ball storage will end up being clearly worth it or not. This isn't the path my team took and it certainly simplified a lot of the robot once we decided not to do this, plus we still have the option to switch to a drop-down "in-the-bumper" intake if we really need that little bit of roller to grab balls against walls. |
|
#48
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Spectrum 3847 - 2017 CAD Model: Gamma Ray
Quote:
|
|
#49
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Spectrum 3847 - 2017 CAD Model: Gamma Ray
Quote:
I'm sure you guys have done your research and totally know what you're doing here, and I don't mean to doubt that. Just trying to share a data point. |
|
#50
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: pic: Spectrum 3847 - 2017 CAD Model: Gamma Ray
Nice work 3847. SJCP has come a long way since I left in 77.
|
|
#51
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Spectrum 3847 - 2017 CAD Model: Gamma Ray
Another benefit of an over the bumper intake being the full width of your front bumper (minus the 3.5 inches of side bumbler on each side) is that it minimizes the ability of balls to space you off the wall by 5 inches. Even with the maximum size gap in your front frame perimeter you still have 19 inches (6*2 + 3.5*2) of bumper without a way to move balls out of the way Scoring gears, picking up gears, inbounding fuel from both the hopper and human player station, and catching HE fuel rebounds are all potentially compromised when your robot can't get flush to the wall. With some spinning and approach angle practice maybe you can knock those balls flying with some consistancy, but critical seconds could be wasted each time you perform one of those operations.
|
|
#52
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Spectrum 3847 - 2017 CAD Model: Gamma Ray
Are you using a PTO for your climber? Or will it be linked to one side of your drive at all times? If so, are you concerned about any additional drag generated for that drive side? Are you going to steering correct with sensors/software?
|
|
#53
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: pic: Spectrum 3847 - 2017 CAD Model: Gamma Ray
The current plan for the climber is for it to be linked to the right side of our drive at all times. We have, however, included VersaPlanetary mounting holes on our side panels in case we want to power it from a dedicated motor. As for the drag, we haven't really decided whether or not we will implement drive-straight code. If, after some driver practice with our practice bot, we realize that the robot is pulling hard, we will likely attempt to account for drift or just decouple from the drive train if the sensor integration proves too finicky.
|
|
#54
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: pic: Spectrum 3847 - 2017 CAD Model: Gamma Ray
Quote:
The process has been detailed in our most recent blog post, which includes a download link to the calculator we used to design the rack teeth. Spectrum Blog ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|