|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
With my teams season now over, myself and a few others on my team have started playing around with the idea of making a swerve drive over our offseason. Here is my first iteration. It is inspired by the work that 2079 did back in lunacy. The part I love most about this style of swerve is not having to design in and mount thrust bearings as the plates of HDPE or similar plastic takes its place. After reading some of the points 2079 made in this post, There are a few design changes I will be making. The main one being making an inlay around the grooves that the HDPE rides on to aid in reduced friction while turning the module.
For machining this we have a new CNC that should be arriving relatively soon equipped with a 4th axis allowing the indexing of this part (such as the cog pattern near the top) to be done in less time and be done more accurately than with a conventional mill and an indexing head.
Any comments/suggestions greatly welcome as this will be our first time dealing with swerve the inherent challenges it brings with it.
01-04-2015 18:00
tindlerootI have done some research into swerves (but not too much), and this design looks pretty nice. The only criticism I have to offer is that it looks really heavy. The lightest swerve modules that I've seen have minimal framework around the wheel, and that module just looks huge and heavy.
A swerve drive is an inherently heavy system to put on a robot, and if you plan to use these on a robot in upcoming seasons then you will want to reduce as much as possible. I recommend checking out the swerves of 1640 and 16, as these are the lightest drives that I know of.
01-04-2015 18:12
This seems like a lot more works than it's worth. Also, why so tall?
01-04-2015 18:56
cad321|
I have done some research into swerves (but not too much), and this design looks pretty nice. The only criticism I have to offer is that it looks really heavy. The lightest swerve modules that I've seen have minimal framework around the wheel, and that module just looks huge and heavy.
A swerve drive is an inherently heavy system to put on a robot, and if you plan to use these on a robot in upcoming seasons then you will want to reduce as much as possible. I recommend checking out the swerves of 1640 and 16, as these are the lightest drives that I know of. |
|
This seems like a lot more works than it's worth. Also, why so tall?
|
01-04-2015 19:02
JaredThis looks pretty cool. It's sort of similar to 696's swerve, which is one of the coolest I've seen in a long time. Their bearing setup works very nicely, but they had to do an incredible amount of machining to make the module frames.
http://2015blog.team696.org/wp-conte...1/IMG_0390.jpg
http://2015blog.team696.org/wp-conte...119_134125.jpg
http://2015blog.team696.org/wp-conte...118_212811.jpg
A few suggestions/ideas:
If you're trying to save weight, you could likely make the whole thing shorter and use gears where you have chains. Vex sells gears with the bolt pattern in them, so you can still have your dead axle.
I'm a little worried about the two plates that drop down and hold the bearings for the bevel gears. The .375" ID flanged round bearings are typically .220" thick or so IIRC, meaning the two fasteners are likely 6's or 8's. Those plates look like they might have trouble support the bearings hanging below them, but it's hard to know from just looking at a few screenshots.
The vertical shaft has only one bearing. This screen shot might be missing the other, but I'd highly recommend adding another one.
01-04-2015 22:56
evand4567You're going to want a second axial support for the vertical bevel gear, it only takes the slightest misalignment in that axle for the gears to skip.
01-04-2015 23:00
cad321|
A few suggestions/ideas:
If you're trying to save weight, you could likely make the whole thing shorter and use gears where you have chains. Vex sells gears with the bolt pattern in them, so you can still have your dead axle. I'm a little worried about the two plates that drop down and hold the bearings for the bevel gears. The .375" ID flanged round bearings are typically .220" thick or so IIRC, meaning the two fasteners are likely 6's or 8's. Those plates look like they might have trouble support the bearings hanging below them, but it's hard to know from just looking at a few screenshots. The vertical shaft has only one bearing. This screen shot might be missing the other, but I'd highly recommend adding another one. |
01-04-2015 23:05
asid61It looks pretty good. I really like how you've made everything so simple, with a 2-piece shell. However, there are a few superficial features that I don't know that you need:
-The height of the module is excessive. More than 5-6 inches is too much. I see you have already elected to fix this.
-Where is the bevel gear and sprocket coming from? If it's the vex one, how are you making a 3/8" hex bore sprocket?
-Those gear teeth up top look cool, but you may not be able to make them even with a 4th axis CNC. Gear tooth cutters often have a very large radius, so it could be difficult to cut small gear teeth there.
-You need a second bearing up top. Don't believe me? Stick a shaft through a single hex bearing and see how much it wobbles.
-Consider the new Vex colson wheels; go for something on the order of 2-3" diameter wheels, as the structure of a swerve drive can sometimes allow it to ride over bumps using the abnormally protruding wheels.
-The mounting for the bearing plates near the top look a little unstable, as they are supported on only one side with thin walls. This would be a lot easier if you scrapped the whole tube-shape design.
As a side note, put all your encoders in CAD. It will make life so much easier. Also put motors, mounting, etc. into the CAD.
01-04-2015 23:33
cad321|
It looks pretty good. I really like how you've made everything so simple, with a 2-piece shell. However, there are a few superficial features that I don't know that you need:
-The height of the module is excessive. More than 5-6 inches is too much. I see you have already elected to fix this. -Where is the bevel gear and sprocket coming from? If it's the vex one, how are you making a 3/8" hex bore sprocket? -Those gear teeth up top look cool, but you may not be able to make them even with a 4th axis CNC. Gear tooth cutters often have a very large radius, so it could be difficult to cut small gear teeth there. As a side note, put all your encoders in CAD. It will make life so much easier. Also put motors, mounting, etc. into the CAD. |
02-04-2015 00:10
75vs1885I feel like doing maintenance on the worm gears would be a pain, getting them set is probably difficult. Why does there need to be a full sleeve around the whole unit? Weight can be saved by cutting a lot of that out. Also, it looks like you have a belt, but sprockets instead of pulleys, or vise versa. Pulleys can save a lot of weight, which could be extremely beneficial.
02-04-2015 00:33
asid61|
The height has already been modified in my most recent update to the module (will post photos a little later)
The bevel gear is the vex one and from the model it looks possible to bore it out to 1/2in and then broach a 1/2in hex into it which is what I am hoping for. If not I will need to rethink that portion. The "gear" pattern at the top is currently meant to interface with an htd 5mm belt allowing the module to turn. I will be making some cuts within the next few days to see if it is possible to make a cog in house that will effectively mesh with such a belt using our resources at hand. As for the encoders, motors, mounting, etc. those are all things that are yet to come. I have begun sketching some layouts for the other components but for the moment this is what I've accomplished these past two days. |
02-04-2015 10:31
MaGiC_PiKaChU
i like the compact design, thing we could not afford with our 2-speed shifters on our modules
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/41416
02-04-2015 11:25
nuclearnerd|
This looks pretty cool. It's sort of similar to 696's swerve, which is one of the coolest I've seen in a long time. Their bearing setup works very nicely, but they had to do an incredible amount of machining to make the module frames.
http://2015blog.team696.org/wp-conte...1/IMG_0390.jpg http://2015blog.team696.org/wp-conte...119_134125.jpg http://2015blog.team696.org/wp-conte...118_212811.jpg |
03-04-2015 19:32
cad321
A few revisions since my initial post. I've added a second bearing to the vertical shaft and the most noticeable change is that I've made the shell shorter by 2in. The shell is now only 6in tall. I tried making it even shorter but the change in weight was negligible and the grooves for the UHMW were starting to get too close together.
|
Also, it looks like you have a belt, but sprockets instead of pulleys, or vise versa. Pulleys can save a lot of weight, which could be extremely beneficial.
|