|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
This is a render of the new swerve that I CADed this summer to be built before the season begins 2015.
18-08-2014 15:47
evanperrygSeems like a pretty daring design, having the modules on the outside. Have you made sure that the modules won't be affected by a hard hit?
18-08-2014 15:55
Adrian ClarkI'd be worried about the strength of using pocketed 1/8" wall tubing to support the weight of the robot and the forces from the wheels. Most swerves I've seen with a similar coaxial setup use 1/4" plate.
I like the originality of you module packaging, why did you choose to do it this way?
Why have the modules on the outside? It would seem like your frame would be stronger and you'd have more electronic placement space with the framerails on the outside.
-Adrian
18-08-2014 16:15
Bryce2471|
Seems like a pretty daring design, having the modules on the outside. Have you made sure that the modules won't be affected by a hard hit?
|
18-08-2014 16:32
Bryce2471|
I'd be worried about the strength of using pocketed 1/8" wall tubing to support the weight of the robot and the forces from the wheels. Most swerves I've seen with a similar coaxial setup use 1/4" plate.
I like the originality of you module packaging, why did you choose to do it this way? Why have the modules on the outside? It would seem like your frame would be stronger and you'd have more electronic placement space with the framerails on the outside. -Adrian |
18-08-2014 17:41
DaleVery cool! Will this make it on a BunnyBot this year?
Also, what is your reduction off of the CIMs? It looks like it will be on the fast side but maybe that's what you intended.
18-08-2014 18:17
Bryce2471|
Very cool! Will this make it on a BunnyBot this year?
Also, what is your reduction off of the CIMs? It looks like it will be on the fast side but may be that's what you intended. |
18-08-2014 19:22
kk052Hmmm... looks somewhat similar to one I've seen before...
just make sure the C brace the swerve's attach to are not shaved completly flat, or you might lose strength in the frame. also are you not worried that the belt might slip off the larger gear because its not flanged?
also most years bumpers must be supported every 8 inches do they mount on the swerves, or is there an additional bracket that is hidden?
18-08-2014 20:32
DaleWell you certainly won't be winning any pushing battles going that fast but on the up side, if it works as well as last year, maybe you won't need to!
18-08-2014 22:26
Tyler2517|
Well you certainly won't be winning any pushing battles going that fast but on the up side, if it works as well as last year, maybe you won't need to!
|
18-08-2014 23:21
asid61|
We proved this year that you don't need to push back to win a pushing battle just not get pushed.
I still think its geared a bit high. |
18-08-2014 23:28
DaleIt's also going to impact acceleration. I suspect being geared that high the robot will seldom actually get to top speed during a match before having to change direction. Usually robots geared that fast will have six CIM drive trains just for that reason.
19-08-2014 13:37
Bryce2471|
It's also going to impact acceleration. I suspect being geared that high the robot will seldom actually get to top speed during a match before having to change direction. Usually robots geared that fast will have six CIM drive trains just for that reason.
|
19-08-2014 13:42
Bryce2471|
...Even so, I would be worried about collisions at that speed on the modules. A hard hit on a corner could render you immobile, as well as costing a few hundred dollars. Even if nothing breaks mechanically, encoders are pretty fragile.
With frame perimeter rules, are you really gaining extra room this way? |
19-08-2014 13:48
DaleYour robots were certainly zippy! I'd love to know how long it took the robot to get to its terminal velocity (and what that velocity is.) Maybe that would be a good fall project for your software folks graphing speed vs time as measured by an encoder on your 2014 robot.
Going that fast will also impact power consumption during acceleration. I wonder what the peak current is.
19-08-2014 14:01
Bryce2471|
Your robots were certainly zippy! I'd love to know how long it took the robot to get to its terminal velocity (and what that velocity is.) Maybe that would be a good fall project for your software folks graphing speed vs time as measured by an encoder on your 2014 robot.
Going that fast will also impact power consumption during acceleration. I wonder what the peak current is. |
19-08-2014 14:16
Andrew Schreiber|
Last years modules only costed about $220 each. I expect this years to be a little higher, but still not too bad. the encoders we are using are non contacting magnetic absolute encoders, so I doubt the would break. Although, if they did, they only cost about $10.
I'm not really sure what you mean by "With frame perimeter rules, are you really gaining extra room this way?" |
20-08-2014 14:16
Bryce2471I forgot to post the estimated weight. According to inventor, these modules will be over a pound lighter that last year's model: Weighing in at 6 lbs each.
Including all that is pictured except the bumper, the drive base should weigh about 30.5 lbs.
20-08-2014 16:46
GdeaverAbsolute encoder. TT electronics 6127 series. .25 to 4.75 volt output. more like 11$ a piece. Used on our swerve for 3 years now. Like them.
20-08-2014 17:00
Bryce2471|
Absolute encoder. TT electronics 6127 series. .25 to 4.75 volt output. more like 11$ a piece. Used on our swerve for 3 years now. Like them.
|
20-08-2014 17:03
Andrew Schreiber|
Absolute encoder. TT electronics 6127 series. .25 to 4.75 volt output. more like 11$ a piece. Used on our swerve for 3 years now. Like them.
|
20-08-2014 17:07
Bryce2471|
Thanks, what's the rotate over point look like? Just a transition from high voltage to low? Can I simply map 0-360 to .25-4.75 and call it a day?
|
20-08-2014 17:08
Andrew Schreiber|
Yes, you can then call it a day. It's really simple to code, and we've found that the end behavior is surprisingly linear.
|
21-08-2014 13:01
seanthompsonCan you post the link to the encoders please?
21-08-2014 21:43
otherguymy guess is they are talking about this part:
http://octopart.com/6127v1a360l.5fs-...ogies-19910150
There are a number of different options it can be ordered in, see data sheet
Note these are rated at 500 RPM in the datasheet. So they likely more than sufficient for monitoring the position of a part - like the wheel's heading in this case. Without proper gearing they are likely not a good choice for use on things like a shooter wheel. If you're looking to monitor wheel rate of travel over ground, these aren't appropriate unless you've got wheels bigger than 6" or have geared the encoder down (assuming you're targeting a top speed or around 14fps).
21-08-2014 21:47
DalePlus it's an analog output so in a high RPM application you'd be monitoring a saw tooth signal on the analog port.
03-11-2014 20:15
aaron_Looks very cool! And yes, I assume they are using this part http://componentsearch.com/search/se...127V1A360L.5FS