|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Weight Reduction
What to do:
-Mill your chassis. This might not come in to the minds of rookie teams or people who just haven't done it, but it can shave off a lot of weight, oh, and it can even make handles on your robot (but I don't suggest that). -Speed holes in week 5/6. Cheese-grater robots are still robots. -Calculate everything. You won't need to make speed holes if you figure it all out beforehand and get it taken care of. -Use thinner material, or use it smarter. I'll leave this for you all to figure out. -Lop off excessively long shafts or bolts. It might add up to that crucial pound or two. -Use lighter parts. Aluminium sprockets, thinner gague wire where thick stuff isn't needed, etc. -Plastics are your friends. Lexan/Polycarbonate/Plexiglass instead of actaul glass (why would you want it?) or aluminium. -Minimize Pneumatics. They're heavy and ineffecient. -Minimize Chain. It might not weigh a bunch on it's own, but it will add up. -If all else fails, Nitroglycerin. Sure, you might not have anything competition-worthy afterwords, but you'll be under the limit. Tools you will need: -Drill -Angle Grinder -Dremel -Nibbler (Maybe?) -Mill (CNC, Precision, or otherwise) -Files. Lots of files. Straight files, round files, cylindrical files. Single cut. Double cut. Bastard. That should help. Oh, and good doses of common sense will help you out, too. |
|
#2
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Weight Reduction
Quote:
If you swiss the frame and it doesn't seem to be affected, you'll be sadly wrong the first time some other team's robot meets your frame up close and in person. Quote:
Adding does not take weight off. Replacing does. If you make something out of plywood, it'll be heavy. If you make it out of Carbon fiber and Aluminum, it'll be much lighter. Quote:
Quote:
Filing will do more than make it flat. Filing will take more off. Lapping would make it perfectly flat (assuming you're using 2000 grit or better). However, I severely doubt that all the alu. you will file off will even be close to a half pound. A quarter, hell, even an eighth of a pound, maybe. But a half? no. |
|
#3
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Weight Reduction
Thinwall square tubing for stuff that doesn't need to take hits. Our shooter frame last year was mainly 3/4" square x 1/16" thick tubing, save for the support frame for the drive for the shooting wheel (1" square x 1/16", IIRC.) Problem is, you can't take much weight off. (But it will hold up as well as L-angle, 1x1x1/8, at least for some purposes, and weigh less.) Wouldn't reccomend it for the drive frame, though.
|
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Weight Reduction
Quote:
I see all this stuff about changing out bolts and such coming before using lighter materials. As a mountain biker, I should technically be counting the weight of my bike in grams. There are people out there that switch out their water bottle cage bolts from aluminum to titanium just to shave a gram off. But the best way to shave weight is to not put heavy stuff on there period. I switched out my wheelset for a lighter, stronger one, and took two whole pounds out of my weight. I replaced my handlebars, stem and seatpost for lighter alloys (and carbon fiber!) and took off a pound and a half. I can shave off another three by changing my mountain tires to my road slicks (but this only is ridable on roads). My bike was 35 pounds when I first got it, and I've knocked the weight down to 30 when riding mountain and 27 when I ride on the roads. If you thought FRC was OCD about weight, you should see the mountain bike community. The sky's the limit when it comes to weight reduction. Sad thing is, unless you're really one with your bike, shaving off 5 pounds actually isn't that noticeable on the mountain. Moral of the story: when you build, keep weight in mind. It's better to save weight in pounds than to remove in grams. You've got a lot of grams to go when your robot weighs 150 pounds (or your bike weighs 40). Save the desperate stuff like bolt switching and speedholes for last. Last edited by geeknerd99 : 19-01-2007 at 10:42. Reason: grammar |
|
#5
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Weight Reduction
Oh, and another piece of advice: Remove functionality only as an absolute last resort. With enough slugbusting and materials replacing, we were able to go from 4 pounds overweight to 2 pounds under without giving up anything last year. Now, some teams have dropped major systems of their robot and still gone on to win regionals (1251 comes to mind), but as a rule....don't do it.
|
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Weight Reduction
very true, we chopped off our shooter and ball gathering device, granted our robot was roughly 60 pounds overweight if I'm not mistaken. The tough part was redesigning the robot to become a dumper on practice day at UCF, good time, good times.
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Quoted picture size reduction | sanddrag | CD Forum Support | 1 | 25-07-2006 19:05 |
| Weight Reduction Help. | Mirza95vx | Technical Discussion | 11 | 07-02-2005 16:03 |
| Gear reduction question | dmellich | Motors | 6 | 25-01-2003 08:54 |
| Speed Reduction for Drill Motors | Ian W. | Programming | 5 | 18-01-2003 23:57 |
| Drill Motor Gearbox Reduction Ratios | archiver | 2000 | 3 | 23-06-2002 23:05 |