|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
Our robot as of 2/2/08. Everything you see there weighs ~61.3lbs, so we figure we're doing pretty good on weight, considering how much the rest of the 'bot weighs. Our chassis team had a fun job with the single chain 
The robot is projected to be finished within a day or two, but we'll see how things go...
03-02-2008 22:44
DarkFlame145Very cool looking, I like the chain system on it.
03-02-2008 22:51
falconmaster
You beat us on the chassis weight, we were 70-75!
03-02-2008 23:24
AdamHeard
Why not use two idlers rather than the curved plastic? It'd be a lot more efficient.
03-02-2008 23:26
TheOtherGuy
The green plastic is our tensioner. The hole is off center, so we just loosen it and rotate it to tension the chain.
03-02-2008 23:27
MrForbes
|
Why not use two idlers rather than the curved plastic? It'd be a lot more efficient.
|
03-02-2008 23:29
GUI|
Why not use two idlers rather than the curved plastic? It'd be a lot more efficient.
|
03-02-2008 23:30
Matt H.I'd say the efficiency loss due to friction on the plastic is minimal and worth the benefit of not having to make very precise holes for idlers. As a general team moto the less machining the better.
03-02-2008 23:35
GdeaverWhy the AL frame. You're using poltrusion below. Why not continue with the uper frame?
03-02-2008 23:37
Matt H.The Al is for mounting the mechanism on it--it save weight (lots) and is easier to machine than pultrusion. Pultrusion must also be thicker to achieve the same strength as aluminum so it would be unwieldy to mount that way.
03-02-2008 23:39
MrForbes
or, the short answer: we had the pultruded fiberglass channel for the frame already, but no thin angle, so we went with aluminum. Also the aluminum is available at Ace hardware, and easy to replace if it we have problems with it in competition.
03-02-2008 23:40
falconmaster
|
Why the AL frame. You're using poltrusion below. Why not continue with the uper frame?
|
03-02-2008 23:44
MrForbes
We like to play around with different materials, finding the best material for each part, kind of as an engineering exercise. A lot of that has to do with the equipment we have available in the shop, time needed to order materials and build parts, as well as the loading on each part. I think fiberglass is really excellent for frames, but it is a bit more tricky to use it in the upper parts of the robot, and we haven't gotten good enough at designing with it yet to feel confident using it there.
03-02-2008 23:45
BHS_STopping
03-02-2008 23:53
falconmaster
|
We like to play around with different materials, finding the best material for each part, kind of as an engineering exercise. A lot of that has to do with the equipment we have available in the shop, time needed to order materials and build parts, as well as the loading on each part. I think fiberglass is really excellent for frames, but it is a bit more tricky to use it in the upper parts of the robot, and we haven't gotten good enough at designing with it yet to feel confident using it there.
|
03-02-2008 23:56
MrForbes
It's actually 4" C channel on the frame. Gary did most of the chassis design on Inventor. Also our promobot we built in the fall used fiberglass for all the structural parts, so we are playing around with it a bit. Time to order more, though
04-02-2008 00:09
AmirIs the tensioner an off the shelf item or machined from a piece of round stock? If it is off the shelf where did you get it? If not what material is it, HMWPE or Nylon? We are looking for a new/easier tensioning system and we have been leaning toward the off-center circle. I would also like to know what materials work best for this method.
Thanks,
Amir
04-02-2008 00:13
MrForbes
We made the green tensioners with oil impregnated nylon rod (2" diameter), turned on the lathe.
The white material (UHMW Polyethylene) that the chain guide is made of would work well too, I suppose...we had the nylon rod left over from last year, so we made the tensioners with it.
Also we added an internal/external tooth lockwasher between the tensioner and frame rail to make sure it would not slip.
04-02-2008 00:14
Matt H.The tensioner is nylon because it tends to self lubricate as it wears away. The piece was machined on a lathe--it was simply a matter of cutting away a little from each side of a thin piece leaving a small runner to guide the chain (you could also cut a groove)--I'll see if I can get some more detailed picture later.
We have been using nylon for tensioners since last year and have little visible wear on it even after two regionals.
04-02-2008 00:22
AmirWe have used the nylon spring-loaded ones from McMaster and it is kind of clunky and hard to incorporate into the chassis.
Can you tell me which nylon round stock you used? I don't need a picture but others may benefit from one.
Thanks
Amir
04-02-2008 00:24
Matt H.Do a mcmaster search for oil-filled nylon rods I believe we used either the 1 1/2in or the 2 in rod.
04-02-2008 00:25
MrForbes
McMaster part number 8664K15 is enough to last for a few years 
04-02-2008 00:32
Aren_Hill
i have to say i do like the pulltrusion shape that easily makes what would've taken multiple pieces of other materials to make. And it would've most likely ended up heavier.
looks like a great drive base, how much did you lower the center wheel?
04-02-2008 00:34
AmirDo you know if the oil-filled nylon is better than the oil-filled UHMWPE, part number 5243T23? The reason I ask is that the chain guides you are using are made from UHMWPE not nylon.
04-02-2008 00:35
Matt H.We used the nylon because we had it on hand--Either should work well.
04-02-2008 00:36
GUI|
Do you know if the oil-filled nylon is better than the oil-filled UHMWPE, part number 5243T23? The reason I ask is that the chain guides you are using are made from UHMWPE not nylon.
|