|
|
|
 I am the person I am because I have come to accept the mistakes I have made, not because I try to change them. - IronicDeadBird [more] |
 |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
| I am the person I am because I have come to accept the mistakes I have made, not because I try to change them. - IronicDeadBird [more] |
|
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
pic: Team 1305's second robot.
|
|
#2
09-02-2016, 00:57
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: pic: Team 1305's second robot.
Out of curiosity, why did your team choose colsons over pneumatic wheels (from this angle, it looks like you're using colsons, although a mixture of both could be possible)
|
|
#3
09-02-2016, 01:10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Team 1305's second robot.
Looking good!
|
|
#4
09-02-2016, 01:11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Team 1305's second robot.
Do my eyes deceive me or is this a 14 wheel drive system? Based on the size of the wheels and the number of axles and bearings it would appear to be.
 Have any issues getting that arm to clear the bumpers? Looks like a pretty tight fit if I'm understanding how it works correctly? Also, what are you at for weight? Looks like you're using some pretty thick aluminum. Last edited by cbale2000 : 09-02-2016 at 01:21.
|
|
#5
09-02-2016, 01:42
|
||||
|
||||
Re: pic: Team 1305's second robot.
Quote:
|
|
#6
09-02-2016, 03:04
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Team 1305's second robot.
You guys aren't wrong. It is 14 powered wheel drive using 4" wheels. We choose this design to try and disable the defences as well AS a track without having the extra difficuly and breakability. And our choice has been very good.
The intake arm clears the bumpers by ~ 1/4". It is very close. There is very little space anyways on this robot. We choose to colon performa wheels for their durability and robustness. We didn't choose pneumatic tire for 2 main reasons; cost (30+dollars per wheel), and the reduced driving capability when not crossing a defence. Last edited by Median240 : 09-02-2016 at 03:12.
|
|
#7
09-02-2016, 07:30
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Team 1305's second robot.
What's the weight as pictured?
Looks good. I like the Intake deployment style. What constraints led to that choice, instead of an intake that folds out? -Nick
|
|
#8
09-02-2016, 07:39
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Team 1305's second robot.
Looks good. I like the Intake deployment style. What constraints led to that choice, instead of an intake that folds out?
-Nick[/quote] The biggest factor that led us to this design was space. To get the amount of reach we wanted with a fold out designated would Nyerere wit our shooter wheels.
|
|
#9
09-02-2016, 13:37
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Team 1305's second robot.
I should have purchased stock in Colson.
|
|
#10
09-02-2016, 17:42
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: pic: Team 1305's second robot.
Nice robot! That shooter looks really similar to ours. What angle does the ball leave at? How's your consistency been?
|
|
#11
09-02-2016, 18:05
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Team 1305's second robot.
It looks at first glance more like a printing press or copier with the cover removed than an FRC robot. Not a bad thing, just curious. Definitely a clean, consistent look.
Are there three belts connecting the front roller shaft with the middle one, or are there interruptions in one or both of those shafts?
|
|
#12
09-02-2016, 22:19
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Team 1305's second robot.
Quote:
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
