|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Air Suspension
Quote:
But regardless of FRC legality, this is a cool project on its own right. Jason |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Air Suspension
Quote:
|
|
#3
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Air Suspension
Creating pressure using mechanical force on legal pneumatic component has been deemed illegal in the past. Reasoning behind such a rule is the possibility of a pneumatic system already at full pressure, with flow restrictors, could conceivably exceed system pressure of 125 PSI if pushed on with enough force.
Also, until last year, pressure modulators were not allowed. Last year, a few changes in the rules did allow them and I remember seeing one robot that had somehow controlled a pressure regulator to achieve a desired effect. I don't remember if it proved advantageous or not. |
|
#4
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Air Suspension
I am loving the idea. It would prove very advantageous for anything. It has true real world potential.
If legal it FIRST I would love to see it on a bot. I agree with Gary, bumpers could cause a problem.. |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Air Suspension
Quote:
Far as the pneumatics I Like the idea of having a pressure relief valve and a pressure regulator to make it legal. |
|
#6
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Air Suspension
Quote:
Just my thoughts. I may be misinterpreting something.. -Rion |
|
#7
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Air Suspension
Eric,
Pneumatic vacuum using cylinders was allowed in 2007 after some discussion, in 2004 it was not. The only legal vacuum devices prior to 2007 were venturis which create vacuum but not by mechanical force. However, even these were not legal in most years. From 2004 Robot Pneumatic section rules <R54> revised... • A device that creates a vacuum is not considered to be a pneumatic device, and is allowed. This includes, but is not limited to, venturi-type vacuum generators and off-the-shelf vacuum devices (as long a they are powered by one of the Kit motors). Some teams used vacuum pumps that were COTS items, removed the motors and replaced them with KOP motors. The FP was the motor of choice that year. Last edited by Al Skierkiewicz : 16-12-2009 at 08:07. |
|
#8
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Air Suspension
Quote:
|
|
#9
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Air Suspension
Eric,
That is a possibility particularly if this was a week one or two event. I did not look into which Q&A prompted which Team Update, I merely quoted the final robot rules revision. I do remember at least one team, buying a cheap vacuum cleaner and replacing the motor with an FP. It worked fairly well as I remember. |
|
#10
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Air Suspension
Not to mention Baxter's bot that year....that was a thing of beauty.
|
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Air Suspension
Installed the air suspension. It does work but requires too much work to make it usefull. Keeping the correct pressure and all the systems needed is no justifiable.
![]() |
|
#12
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Air Suspension
It's not just your bumper zone you can throw out of whack with a design like that, it's your whole profile!
We had a drop down wheel this year that raised the front of our robot up ever so slightly, & when we measured it, the bot was out of profile with the wheel in the down position. We had to cut our frame depth (front to back) a bit so that when it leaned back it was still in profile. Just one more thing to consider. |
|
#13
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Air Suspension
IIRC, Al, it did not extend to the generation of vacuums. I know of three separate instances where a team used 100% FRC-legal pneumatics to generate a vacuum via mechanical means. (2 in 2004 and 1 in 2007). All three were judged legal. It is possible to argue that this system creates 2 vacuum systems.
You could also make the argument that this effectively creates 2 closed-loop gas shocks, which have a rather off-and-on legality if I remember the past rules correctly. (Of course, then that begs the question of "Why not just do that on one cylinder instead of two?", but that's beside the point.) And remember, now that we are in a bit of a rules discussion: 2010 rules may forbid pneumatics altogether or otherwise make this design either legal or illegal, so anything said here may or may not apply after 1/9/2010. |
|
#14
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Air Suspension
Quote:
|
|
#15
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Air Suspension
Quote:
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| pic: Robot suspension | joeweber | Extra Discussion | 11 | 15-01-2010 20:32 |
| pic: 8WD 'Suspension' Chassis Concept | JesseK | Extra Discussion | 8 | 09-12-2008 22:00 |
| pic: 6 wheel suspension | joeweber | Extra Discussion | 16 | 13-11-2008 18:22 |
| pic: FRC 1726 suspension | MrForbes | Extra Discussion | 4 | 22-12-2006 15:57 |
| pic: vex suspension | psyco_klown | Extra Discussion | 9 | 14-11-2006 22:18 |