|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
| View Poll Results: Mecanum or 6WD | |||
| Mecanum |
|
90 | 40.36% |
| 6WD |
|
133 | 59.64% |
| Voters: 223. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Mecanum or 6WD
To get across the field.
|
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Mecanum or 6WD
this isn't a very defensive game, so i don't think you need to worry about traction and pushing power. no other robot will play heavy defense.
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Mecanum or 6WD
Quote:
As long as the robots are allowed to contact each other, traction will be important. Its not that hard to find a way to slow down another robot, and pinning is not the only way to slow down or stop another robot from scoring. ask all the robots that sat in front of a goal last year, or all the robots that are going to turn sideways and mirror your attempts to pass them. I think I would be able to teach my alliance partners to play pestering defense in under 30 seconds. |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Mecanum or 6WD
It's a pretty board statement, but from my experience I'd have to say 6WD because a macanum bot will get pushed around easily.
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Mecanum or 6WD
I'm going to disagree with teams that go "mecanum = agility". Every year I see so many teams who say "oh we should be agile so we need a mecanum drive" and it drives me nuts.
First, agile is a very vague term. Mecanum has a specific kind of motion it can do that 6wd can't. The real question is do you need that kind of motion? Second, it is very easy to underrate the "agility" of a 6wd system. It can turn easily on a dime and drive very well in that fashion. The only thing it can't do is strafe. Essentially, the trade off is strafing sideways or resistance to pushing / pushing power. Which is more important? |
|
#6
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Mecanum or 6WD
Quote:
Well stated. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Mecanum or 6WD
We are going to test both. We have a team working on each type. We have found our past mecanum systems to be plenty fast. I also think that they are advantageous this year with the narrow feeder chute. It might be easier to make lateral corrections to our position with the crabbing ability. Rather than having to back up and turn, we can make small moves sideways if our tubes are a bit off.
As for dealing with defenders, our drivers have been able to use crabbing to outmaneuver less agile robots. We are sometimes a bit slower in a straightaway than 6 wheeled robots, but haven't been significantly disadvantaged by that. We are interested in whether the rocking motion of the CA drive will make use vulnerable to tipping when extended. Jury is still out, of course. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|