|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
Team 2022's drivebase, it is powered by 1 CIM and 2 globe turning motor's. We have it set up like a "warthog" drive where the front wheels turn, and the back wheels turn.
02-03-2009 17:52
Swttrt224What a BEAST of a drivebase....some genius must of invented that...
oh wait, HA, I invented that... lol :-)
It's amazing that we were easily able to push around Wildstang's 4 CIM swerve with traction control AND Winnovation's tank with traction control...
02-03-2009 17:57
gorrillaso only 1 cim for all 4 wheels? or one for each wheel?
02-03-2009 18:48
Lil' Lavery
Where else were you using your CIM motors?
02-03-2009 19:03
big1boom
Standard toughbox transmission, then chain sprockets set up as follows 15:9:bevel:11:22
We only have 1 other CIM and it is on the power dumper.
02-03-2009 19:08
Lil' Lavery
02-03-2009 19:13
big1boom
We did the calculations, and 1 CIM would provide more than enough torque to skid the wheels. But then when it was tested at Midwest, we have just enough torque to get nearly maximum acceleration. But we do not have enough to spin our wheels. This means that we are always in static friction. So we actually have better traction than bots that have to use sensors and traction control code. This is why we were able to push around Wildstang, who have 4 CIM's and active traction control.
We could throw a 2nd CIM in. But as it is now, the CIM does not overheat, we have maximum traction, and fairly good acceleration. So why change?
02-03-2009 19:34
CJmangoWow, that is awfully insightful. I'm always a fan of bigger and more powerful but this year I think you've got the right idea. All of these other teams are spending their energy developing software to limit their beefy drivetrains, instead you avoid designing a beefy drivetrain in the first place.
The active traction control is still a disadvantage because in most cases, in order for it to activate, the wheels have to slip. Pushing the slip boundary like that makes it easier to push them if you're solidly in static friction.
That picture also blows up nicely, but I don’t think we can see the bevel gears in the housing. Do you have any pictures from the assembly process?
Kudos on a crazy cool design.
02-03-2009 19:41
big1boom
Thanks for the complement.
I will try and find a picture of the inside of the box.
02-03-2009 19:49
big1boom
Pretty big image so I will just link to it.
http://i43.tinypic.com/nd6a90.jpg
Here is a small version.

That is the best picture that I can find. We didn't take any intentional pictures of the wheelbox's.
02-03-2009 20:28
spage|
What a BEAST of a drivebase....some genius must of invented that...
oh wait, HA, I invented that... lol :-) It's amazing that we were easily able to push around Wildstang's 4 CIM swerve with traction control AND Winnovation's tank with traction control... |





02-03-2009 20:32
spageHow much more practice will it take before I am able to get a job with some drafting company?
14-03-2009 21:03
Kat Kononovscott, i'm really impressed with your CAD drawing. don't lose this skill.
15-03-2009 00:16
spagethanks- we got lots to people looking over our drive train at Wisconsin - they liked that it used easy to find parts- Post season plan is to teach the sophs to cad-
09-04-2009 20:10
keehunWow, amazing drive base. I am wondering, will the CAD files ever be uploaded?
Thank you,
Keehun,
Captain, Team 2502
10-04-2009 18:00
JHSmentorSo - did you drive this as a crab drive or did you switch between all wheels pointing in the same direction (crab) and having the front / back wheels pointed in opposite directions? Or - did you just drive with the front and back wheels turning oppositely?
I ask because our bot this year was a somewhat similar design but probably a lot more simple (we just don't have the equipment to do anything more fancy). We had Ackermann steering for the front wheels and Ackermann for the back wheels separetely so they would turn opposite each other. our experience was very similar: we could push any other bot around easily and in many cases, 2 bots at a time (no traction control used either). Having properly designed Ackermann steering allowed the wheels to point in the direction of the turn at all times so there was no slip required to turn.
10-04-2009 21:38
big1boom
|
So - did you drive this as a crab drive or did you switch between all wheels pointing in the same direction (crab) and having the front / back wheels pointed in opposite directions? Or - did you just drive with the front and back wheels turning oppositely?
I ask because our bot this year was a somewhat similar design but probably a lot more simple (we just don't have the equipment to do anything more fancy). We had Ackermann steering for the front wheels and Ackermann for the back wheels separetely so they would turn opposite each other. our experience was very similar: we could push any other bot around easily and in many cases, 2 bots at a time (no traction control used either). Having properly designed Ackermann steering allowed the wheels to point in the direction of the turn at all times so there was no slip required to turn. |