|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
This is our prototype for this years base. We are going to start welding the actual frame soon because we are not actually thinking about using a wooden frame ;-)
Yes, it does drive on it's own power up the small steps. Right now we have one drill motor driving all four motors, this will eventually be two. To steer we use two globe motors, one for the front wheels and one for the back. This allows us to do two things:
A) Tank-turn by turning the front wheels 180 degrees from the back wheels. This allows us to change the robots orientation easily.
and
B) Change to a car drive mode where only the front wheels turn.
To drive the swerve, right now we have one joystick. In programming we convert the x and y coordinates to polar by using lookup tables. This gives us the angle we want the wheels to face, and then the magnitude for how fast we want to drive. We still have to work out some smoothness issues, but I am looking forward to a great year! Enjoy the pic, let us know what you think =)
20-01-2004 11:31
Skabana159
Are you using potentiometers or digital encoders to track the orientation of your wheels?
Also, can I get a close-up shot of your drill's gearbox? It looks neat.
20-01-2004 16:10
Greg Needel
very nice system....have you had any problems with drawing too much current or stalling the drill motor since you are only using 1 to power all 4 wheels?
20-01-2004 22:00
WakeZeroWe use two pots on both steering chains to determine position, so four total. As for the one drill motor issues, we have noticed that problem to a small extent... but they will go away once we install the second drill 
21-01-2004 00:00
WakeZero

We lovingly refer to this little contraption as the X-Box, since it's chains form an X that go out to drive each wheel. What it allows is for two drill motors to be mounted horizontally on the robot to drive the wheels. It also has a nice feature in that it makes the drill motors spin in the same direction (Clockwise and Clockwise, or CCW and CCW) 
We may be taking out the four shafts around the middle one and just putting four or two sprockets on the top of the middle shaft... we would only do this if we thought it was too inefficient, or we were hurting for weight 
21-01-2004 00:24
Madison
|
Originally Posted by WakeZero
We lovingly refer to this little contraption as the X-Box, since it's chains form an X that go out to drive each wheel. What it allows is for two drill motors to be mounted horizontally on the robot to drive the wheels. It also has a nice feature in that it makes the drill motors spin in the same direction (Clockwise and Clockwise, or CCW and CCW)
![]() We may be taking out the four shafts around the middle one and just putting four or two sprockets on the top of the middle shaft... we would only do this if we thought it was too inefficient, or we were hurting for weight ![]() |
21-01-2004 00:29
edomus|
Originally Posted by M. Krass
It's clear that it can translate along the ground -- but how does it turn? With two motors powering a single gearbox that drives all four wheels, is differential steering possible?
|
21-01-2004 00:38
WakeZero
Here is what we use to turn ONE set of wheels. We have one of these on the back two wheels, and one on the front. You can't see them in the picture because they are mounted upward, and hidden by the frame 
I explained it in the picture description, but that doesn't show up in the discussion. So here it is again 
|
Yes, it does drive on it's own power up the small steps. Right now we have one drill motor driving all four motors, this will eventually be two. To steer we use two globe motors, one for the front wheels and one for the back. This allows us to do two things: A) Tank-turn by turning the front wheels 180 degrees from the back wheels. This allows us to change the robots orientation easily. and B) Change to a car drive mode where only the front wheels turn. To drive the swerve, right now we have one joystick. In programming we convert the x and y coordinates to polar by using lookup tables. This gives us the angle we want the wheels to face, and then the magnitude for how fast we want to drive. |
21-01-2004 01:08
Travis CovingtonFrom what I can tell, it looks like there is no support on the other side of the globe motor shaft. It may just be the picture you showed, but in that configuration there is a significant side load that (typically) results in the globe motor releasing its magic smoke 
If I am incorrect, sorry about that... Just thought I would note that... its an easy fix.
Otherwise it is VERY original! Looks good!
21-01-2004 01:43
WizardOfAz
|
Originally Posted by Travis Covington
From what I can tell, it looks like there is no support on the other side of the globe motor shaft. It may just be the picture you showed, but in that configuration there is a significant side load that (typically) results in the globe motor releasing its magic smoke
![]() If I am incorrect, sorry about that... Just thought I would note that... its an easy fix. Otherwise it is VERY original! Looks good! |
21-01-2004 04:56
Travis CovingtonYour assumption would be correct for almost all motors in the kit except the globe motor (in my honest opinion).
For some reason (maybe someone knows specifically) the globe motor is VERY sensitive to side loads. In past years when my team used these motors, if the shaft was not supported on both ends we would ruin the motor, even if it was used rarely.
If it is possible (it looks failry easy) you might want to try and put a bearing supporting the shaft on the other end... even though you might not really need it... it seems like it serves an important enough function to deem the extra work beneficial... even if it only gives you peace of mind.
Hope that helps 
21-01-2004 10:19
WakeZeroThanks Travis, we will surely be looking into this now 
21-01-2004 12:02
Paul CopioliI am going to have to back up Travis on this one. We used the globe motors for swerve steering in 2002 and we hade to add a bearing to support the load. We ruined 3 globe motors on our prototype unitl we figured it out. Once we added the bearing, we did not fail any globe motors.
-Paul
21-01-2004 12:44
WizardOfAz
|
Originally Posted by Paul Copioli
I am going to have to back up Travis on this one. We used the globe motors for swerve steering in 2002 and we hade to add a bearing to support the load. We ruined 3 globe motors on our prototype unitl we figured it out. Once we added the bearing, we did not fail any globe motors.
-Paul |
21-01-2004 13:13
Paul CopioliThe first indications on our robot were that the wheels were not getting to the position we commanded. At first, we thought it was the potentiometer going bad, but it was actually the motor not having enough torque at the lower gains (as it gets closer to the commanded position). The motor slowely loses torque capacity as you fail the front bushing. The planetary gears inside the globe transmission start to wear and bind up, thus losing torque capacity. The motor will eventually lock up, but the swerve steering will suffer long before lock up.
-Paul
21-01-2004 21:16
Joe Johnson
The main reason the Globes need support is that they have only one bearing if you don't. The second bearing becomes the planetary gears on the last stage if you don't give it an external one. This is very bad for efficiency of the gearbox.
Joe J.
22-01-2004 12:31
ajlapp
i noticed you have clearance for the steps....any thoughts about going up the sides of the platform. there isn't much room around that goal once you go up the steps.
22-01-2004 14:31
WizardOfAz
|
Originally Posted by ajlapp
i noticed you have clearance for the steps....any thoughts about going up the sides of the platform. there isn't much room around that goal once you go up the steps.
|
23-01-2004 00:04
WizardOfAz
|
Originally Posted by Paul H
How much does that prototype weigh?
|
23-01-2004 02:12
FotoPlasma
Do you think you might be able to post a CAD or two of the wheel modules? I am very interested in how you implemented the coaxial swerve system.
23-01-2004 11:42
WizardOfAz
|
Originally Posted by FotoPlasma
Do you think you might be able to post a CAD or two of the wheel modules? I am very interested in how you implemented the coaxial swerve system.
|
23-01-2004 11:59
bjammin64hey, i was just wondering how exactly the driver will control all of this. would it mbe one person, or would both drivers have to work together to achieve topmost maneuveurability
23-01-2004 12:11
WizardOfAz
|
Originally Posted by bjammin64
hey, i was just wondering how exactly the driver will control all of this. would it mbe one person, or would both drivers have to work together to achieve topmost maneuveurability
|