OCCRA
Go to Post We owe a lot to Bob (Hammond), he is a true gentleman. - Covey41 [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > CD-Media > Photos
CD-Media  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

photos

papers

everything



Slip Ring Swerve

By: justin.chau
New: 07-22-2018 06:08 PM
Updated: 07-22-2018 06:33 PM
Views: 1825 times


Slip Ring Swerve

This is a swerve drive design I have been working on recently. It's inspired by Bomb Squad's swerve as well as some designs by Bryce2471. It has a 17.33:1 gear ratio for a free speed of 14.14 ft/s. The rotation is powered with a 775pro with a 52.86:1 reduction.

You can view the model here:
https://workbench.grabcad.com/workbench/projects/gcRD2IcvxMu1euycifAqgj5gfv9jC1O0Nuc5g3tgk_Nv56#/space/gcIyxEkCA7pLUacNR34n2a-68TOnap6sMkmVsn-NoM64Kg/link/1424800

Thanks,
Justin

Recent Viewers

  • Guest

Discussion

view entire thread

Reply

07-22-2018 11:43 PM

Ollystorm


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Hey man, that's a pretty sweet design!! What's the black ...thing... on top of the wheel sticking vertically up? I can't see an obvious purpose for it.



07-23-2018 12:03 AM

Richard Wallace


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

That's the slip ring, not showing the wires.

I agree it is a pretty cool design. Very low ground clearance, so maybe not for every game.

I also think it is geared aggressively. 17.33 from the 775pro to a three inch Colson puts the slip current (on FRC carpet) a little over 60 Ampere, so you are traction limited on the "wrong" side of peak power. No real issue as long as you stay out of shoving matches, with other robots or with a barrier.



07-23-2018 01:22 AM

Marcus Q


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Wallace View Post
That's the slip ring, not showing the wires.

I agree it is a pretty cool design. Very low ground clearance, so maybe not for every game.

I also think it is geared aggressively. 17.33 from the 775pro to a three inch Colson puts the slip current (on FRC carpet) a little over 60 Ampere, so you are traction limited on the "wrong" side of peak power. No real issue as long as you stay out of shoving matches, with other robots or with a barrier.
Would you mind expanding on being traction limited in the "wrong" side of peak power?



07-23-2018 09:18 AM

wgorgen


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Couple of questions:

Why the 775 for steering? With the drive motor on the turret, there will not be any reaction torque back into the steering motor from the drive torque. So it seems like you could easily reduce the size, weight and cost of the module by switching to a smaller motor like an RS550.

What slip ring are you using? How many wires and what rating per wire? What are your wire allocations?

The most appropriate slip ring we have been able to find is a 6 wire with 30 amps per wire rating. But this slip ring would not allow you to send full power to the drive motor without using 2 wires to feed power and 2 wires for power ground return. This leaves only 2 wires for a wheel speed encoder. However, if you limit the motor power to 30 amps in the motor controller, then you would still have 4 wires available for the encoder.



07-23-2018 09:35 AM

Mark Wasserman


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by wgorgen View Post
Couple of questions:

Why the 775 for steering? With the drive motor on the turret, there will not be any reaction torque back into the steering motor from the drive torque. So it seems like you could easily reduce the size, weight and cost of the module by switching to a smaller motor like an RS550.

What slip ring are you using? How many wires and what rating per wire? What are your wire allocations?

The most appropriate slip ring we have been able to find is a 6 wire with 30 amps per wire rating. But this slip ring would not allow you to send full power to the drive motor without using 2 wires to feed power and 2 wires for power ground return. This leaves only 2 wires for a wheel speed encoder. However, if you limit the motor power to 30 amps in the motor controller, then you would still have 4 wires available for the encoder.
I think that's a Talon downstream of the slip ring. Looks like the plan is to pass CAN through the slip ring. 2 for power, 2 for ground, 2 for CAN.

RS550 would be a better choice for azimuth IMO.



07-23-2018 11:05 AM

wgorgen


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Wasserman View Post
I think that's a Talon downstream of the slip ring. Looks like the plan is to pass CAN through the slip ring. 2 for power, 2 for ground, 2 for CAN.
Has anyone (i.e. Bomb Squad) done this and had success? I would be worried about noise in the slip ring contactors. But maybe at typical swerve rotational speeds the slip ring is pretty noise-free.



07-23-2018 11:07 AM

asid61


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by wgorgen View Post
Has anyone (i.e. Bomb Squad) done this and had success? I would be worried about noise in the slip ring contactors. But maybe at typical swerve rotational speeds the slip ring is pretty noise-free.
At least one team has successfully run CAN through a slip ring, although I forget who. I was quite impressed with it.



07-23-2018 11:31 AM

marshall


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by asid61 View Post
At least one team has successfully run CAN through a slip ring, although I forget who. I was quite impressed with it.
323 and I believe 16 as well are doing this.



07-23-2018 11:35 AM

Andrew Schreiber


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

323 did (as has 16), we had no major issues pertaining to data transmission. I don't recall seeing CAN errors caused by it. (Logs showed CAN errors caused by some issues on the PDP). Quantifying this data is on my TODO list but it may be OBE by other developments, will depend on prioritization of resources and goals.

It used 2x 775Pros and thus 2x Talon SRXs on each module, they were on 30A breakers each. Encoder feedback could be retrieved via CAN bus but was local to the SRXs for motion profiling purposes.



07-23-2018 11:35 AM

kyle_hamblett


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Wasserman View Post
I think that's a Talon downstream of the slip ring. Looks like the plan is to pass CAN through the slip ring. 2 for power, 2 for ground, 2 for CAN.

RS550 would be a better choice for azimuth IMO.
Wouldn't you need 4 wires for CAN, as it's run in series, as in 2 in and 2 out?



07-23-2018 11:44 AM

GeeTwo


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by mman1506 View Post
Would you mind expanding on being traction limited in the "wrong" side of peak power?
For reference, the power curve for the 775 pro is the green line in the first graph on this page.

The "right" side of peak power is faster and lower torque, which is on the right side of the graph. If the load increases, the motor slows down, the torque increases, and the power rises to meet the demand. This side of the power peak also has significantly greater efficiency (dotted red line), meaning less of your battery power turning into heat in the motor.

The "wrong" side is slower and higher torque than the power peak. Same statements, in reverse.



07-23-2018 12:18 PM

lapickett


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

I have never seen heaven and hell in one picture. Great design.



07-23-2018 12:26 PM

justin.chau


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ollystorm View Post
Hey man, that's a pretty sweet design!! What's the black ...thing... on top of the wheel sticking vertically up? I can't see an obvious purpose for it.
Thank you! And yup, that's the slip ring.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wgorgen View Post
Couple of questions:

Why the 775 for steering? With the drive motor on the turret, there will not be any reaction torque back into the steering motor from the drive torque. So it seems like you could easily reduce the size, weight and cost of the module by switching to a smaller motor like an RS550.

What slip ring are you using? How many wires and what rating per wire? What are your wire allocations?

The most appropriate slip ring we have been able to find is a 6 wire with 30 amps per wire rating. But this slip ring would not allow you to send full power to the drive motor without using 2 wires to feed power and 2 wires for power ground return. This leaves only 2 wires for a wheel speed encoder. However, if you limit the motor power to 30 amps in the motor controller, then you would still have 4 wires available for the encoder.
The 775pro is used for steering mostly due to my unfamiliarity with swerve. I know the 775pro is overkill for this application though. If this is built, I plan to run the 775pro below 12v. It should help reduce thermal buildup compared to an RS550. It is a VP though, so it's easily changeable to an RS550 if wanted.

The slip ring I found is also a 6 wire rated at 30 amps per wire. I suspect it's the same one you found. There is a Talon SRX on the module though, so CAN can be used to read the encoder data. This leaves 4 wires for the motor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kyle_hamblett View Post
Wouldn't you need 4 wires for CAN, as it's run in series, as in 2 in and 2 out?
The CAN topology is relatively flexible. I believe that 16's setup was similar in that they ran CAN through their slip ring. It is possible to use only 2 wires for can using a star topology, for example.



07-23-2018 12:34 PM

Mark Wasserman


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by kyle_hamblett View Post
Wouldn't you need 4 wires for CAN, as it's run in series, as in 2 in and 2 out?
The 2 yellow wires and 2 green wires are electrically the same. Inside the Talon they literally twist them together and solder them to the PCB. That's why there is no labeled "innie" or "outie" on the CAN wires. I don't see why you can't make the junction on the stationary side of the swerve. I would dissect the slip ring to try to figure out which 2 slip rings that are farthest away from the others for noise purposes.



07-23-2018 12:34 PM

IndySam


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

We ran CAN up to a PCM module on our gripper/upperstage this year without a return. Even though a couple inspectors didn't like the fact that we didn't have a terminating resistor it worked all season.



07-23-2018 01:06 PM

marshall


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by IndySam View Post
We ran CAN up to a PCM module on our gripper/upperstage this year without a return. Even though a couple inspectors didn't like the fact that we didn't have a terminating resistor it worked all season.
The CAN bus on FRC robots is surprisingly robust. That being said, minimizing errors is imperative depending on the use case.



07-23-2018 01:28 PM

philso


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by justin.chau View Post
...The CAN topology is relatively flexible. I believe that 16's setup was similar in that they ran CAN through their slip ring. It is possible to use only 2 wires for can using a star topology, for example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Wasserman View Post
The 2 yellow wires and 2 green wires are electrically the same. Inside the Talon they literally twist them together and solder them to the PCB. That's why there is no labeled "innie" or "outie" on the CAN wires. I don't see why you can't make the junction on the stationary side of the swerve. I would dissect the slip ring to try to figure out which 2 slip rings that are farthest away from the others for noise purposes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndySam View Post
We ran CAN up to a PCM module on our gripper/upperstage this year without a return. Even though a couple inspectors didn't like the fact that we didn't have a terminating resistor it worked all season.

The CAN standard was designed to have a large noise margin so that it is fairly tolerant of "non-ideal" implementations. By following the normal guidelines, one is virtually guaranteed success. By using a non-ideal implementation, one introduces risk that is difficult to predict and quantify. Only thorough testing will reveal if the implementation is acceptable. The level of risk is also difficult to reproduce i.e. "copying exactly" what 829 did this year may lead to problems in a different robot.



07-23-2018 07:26 PM

s-neff


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by philso View Post
The CAN standard was designed to have a large noise margin so that it is fairly tolerant of "non-ideal" implementations. By following the normal guidelines, one is virtually guaranteed success.
Do you have a source for "normal guidelines" I can review w/ my students?

Background, we got CAN errors at the end of the daisy chain on this year's robot, but didn't have time to troubleshoot beyond "swapped the physical device, it works now go" at SVR.

We ran twelve devices on the bus this year, mostly physically located directly off the PDP (for minimum power wire length to each Talon). The preattached CAN wires were extremely too long, so after we soldered the adjacent devices, we bundled them up and tucked them underneath the power leads. It's physically beautiful and preserves cable length for future years, but in retrospect added a fat inductance loop between each device. The final device on the daisy chain (Talon controlling an intake arm) got the intermittent control errors.
Would those inductance loops be contributing to this? Or do I need to look elsewhere?

Quote:
Originally Posted by OP
Sweet design
Sweet! The drive rectangle turned out especially well, I really like the packaging you found. Do you have any provision to spring-load it similar to 2767's positraction?



07-23-2018 08:13 PM

Marcus Q


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by s-neff View Post
Sweet! The drive rectangle turned out especially well, I really like the packaging you found. Do you have any provision to spring-load it similar to 2767's positraction?
I've been think about this a bit, I wonder if mounting the assembly on a elastomeric damper (like these) would give enough compliance to provide a similar effect with reduced complexity.



07-23-2018 08:25 PM

wgorgen


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber View Post
323 did (as has 16), we had no major issues pertaining to data transmission. I don't recall seeing CAN errors caused by it. (Logs showed CAN errors caused by some issues on the PDP). Quantifying this data is on my TODO list but it may be OBE by other developments, will depend on prioritization of resources and goals.
Good to know. Thanks!



07-23-2018 08:28 PM

GeeTwo


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Just based on thinking about it (not experience), if I were to implement CAN through slip rings and only use two data lines per slip ring, I would try a "bus with branches". That is, after going to all of the controllers on the central board, send a bus out that makes the circuit of the wheels. At each of those, implement as short a branch as possible from the tee off the bus to the motor controller behind the slip ring. I wouldn't put terminating resistors inside the branch modules, but would terminate the end of the bus. This topology should reduce the sort of collisions which a star topology is likely to experience. If the steering motors were controlled on the long bus, I would try to put their controllers significantly farther from the "tee" junction than the drive motor controllers.



07-24-2018 01:28 PM

philso


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by s-neff View Post
Do you have a source for "normal guidelines" I can review w/ my students?
The instructions found when scrolling down to "RoboRIO to PCM CAN" in this implements the "High Speed CAN Network" found in this.


Quote:
Originally Posted by s-neff View Post
Background, we got CAN errors at the end of the daisy chain on this year's robot, but didn't have time to troubleshoot beyond "swapped the physical device, it works now go" at SVR.

We ran twelve devices on the bus this year, mostly physically located directly off the PDP (for minimum power wire length to each Talon). The preattached CAN wires were extremely too long, so after we soldered the adjacent devices, we bundled them up and tucked them underneath the power leads. It's physically beautiful and preserves cable length for future years, but in retrospect added a fat inductance loop between each device. The final device on the daisy chain (Talon controlling an intake arm) got the intermittent control errors.
Would those inductance loops be contributing to this? Or do I need to look elsewhere?
The inductance from bundling the wires like you did will be insignificant and is not likely to have a significant effect on the signal integrity of the CAN Bus. Locating the bundle of CAN wires adjacent to the power leads could lead to noise being coupled from the power leads into your CAN Bus wires. Separating them by 1/2 inch or 1 inch will dramatically reduce the coupling since the magnetic field strength is inversely proportional to the distance cubed.

Your CAN error problem at SVR could have also been a faulty device. Have you tried it installed in a different location?



07-24-2018 02:05 PM

s-neff


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by philso View Post
The instructions found when scrolling down to "RoboRIO to PCM CAN" in this implements the "High Speed CAN Network" found in this.
Thank you! I think I'm looking for something more like 'guidelines for reducing noise in wiring harness layouts'? Or 'how do I protect my data lines in an FRC setting'?
The introduction to this might be 'why you don't need to protect your data lines in FRC' - I've definitely seen some really nightmarish looking stuff that still Just Works.
(In the past, we've done this by putting 10'+ runs for sensor/controls signals through shielded Cat5E or Cat6 cable)

....related to topology, should the star layouts being bandied about on CD change over to the "Low Speed CAN" architecture, or will the firmware freak out if the resistor layout is changed like that?
Quote:
The inductance from bundling the wires like you did will be insignificant and is not likely to have a significant effect on the signal integrity of the CAN Bus. Locating the bundle of CAN wires adjacent to the power leads could lead to noise being coupled from the power leads into your CAN Bus wires. Separating them by 1/2 inch or 1 inch will dramatically reduce the coupling since the magnetic field strength is inversely proportional to the distance cubed.
Got it. Thank you!

Would adding grounded aluminum foil between them also be an effective tactic? I don't think I *want* to do this, but I want to check my phyiscal understanding.
Quote:
Your CAN error problem at SVR could have also been a faulty device. Have you tried it installed in a different location?
No, we haven't tried reusing the device, but we did get through a three hour offseason demonstration without fatal CAN errors on the new Talon. So there's a decent chance it was a faulty device. It's on my list to troubleshoot further, and if I can isolate it to the device I'll send it to CTRE.



07-24-2018 02:49 PM

wgorgen


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by s-neff View Post
Would adding grounded aluminum foil between them also be an effective tactic? I don't think I *want* to do this, but I want to check my phyiscal understanding.
The most effective way to reduce the magnetic fields is to twist the power and return lines together. The equal and opposite current flow will produce equal and opposite magnetic fields. Those fields only completely cancel each other out if the two wires are in exactly the same line through space (physically impossible). The closest you can get to having them cancel out is when you have the two wires as close together as possible. The easiest way to ensure this is to twist the wires together.



07-24-2018 02:49 PM

DriftVelocity


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Wasserman View Post
The 2 yellow wires and 2 green wires are electrically the same. Inside the Talon they literally twist them together and solder them to the PCB. That's why there is no labeled "innie" or "outie" on the CAN wires. I don't see why you can't make the junction on the stationary side of the swerve. I would dissect the slip ring to try to figure out which 2 slip rings that are farthest away from the others for noise purposes.
In a way that is true, but there are caveats. Transmission lines are not simple conductors, but they can be approximated as such over over 'short' distances (the exact definition of 'short' varies considerably). The conductive path internal to the Talon is insignificant in the context of the signal it carries, but there is a limit to how much you can get away with before your signal integrity margins start to become uncomfortably slim. On top of that the available margin is likely already reduced in this scenario since the slip ring probably does not provide a proper impedance match to the CAN lines.



07-24-2018 03:06 PM

justin.chau


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by s-neff View Post
...Sweet! The drive rectangle turned out especially well, I really like the packaging you found. Do you have any provision to spring-load it similar to 2767's positraction?
Thank you! I didn't really think about spring loading it when originally designing it, but the mounts that mman1506 posted seem like something interesting to look into and test.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mman1506 View Post
I've been think about this a bit, I wonder if mounting the assembly on a elastomeric damper (like these) would give enough compliance to provide a similar effect with reduced complexity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeeTwo View Post
Just based on thinking about it (not experience), if I were to implement CAN through slip rings and only use two data lines per slip ring, I would try a "bus with branches". That is, after going to all of the controllers on the central board, send a bus out that makes the circuit of the wheels. At each of those, implement as short a branch as possible from the tee off the bus to the motor controller behind the slip ring. I wouldn't put terminating resistors inside the branch modules, but would terminate the end of the bus. This topology should reduce the sort of collisions which a star topology is likely to experience. If the steering motors were controlled on the long bus, I would try to put their controllers significantly farther from the "tee" junction than the drive motor controllers.
Thanks for the insight. We may try this if we actually manufacture this swerve. No doubt, we will have to experiment to find the most reliable setup.



07-24-2018 03:09 PM

philso


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by s-neff View Post
Thank you! I think I'm looking for something more like 'guidelines for reducing noise in wiring harness layouts'? Or 'how do I protect my data lines in an FRC setting'?
The introduction to this might be 'why you don't need to protect your data lines in FRC' - I've definitely seen some really nightmarish looking stuff that still Just Works.
(In the past, we've done this by putting 10'+ runs for sensor/controls signals through shielded Cat5E or Cat6 cable)
Since the CAN Bus is a digital system, it's behaviour will be non-linear with respect to the noise amplitude. That is why there are recommended best practices, some of which sometimes don't seem to do anything. As long as the noise is not so large that a "0" becomes a "1" or vice versa, the system will work properly. A change that increases the amplitude of the noise will then start causing problems.


Quote:
Originally Posted by s-neff View Post
....related to topology, should the star layouts being bandied about on CD change over to the "Low Speed CAN" architecture, or will the firmware freak out if the resistor layout is changed like that?
Yes, teams have done this successfully but it is probably less tolerant so less experienced teams should probably avoid doing this since it may take a lot of time to find and fix a error.


Quote:
Originally Posted by s-neff View Post
Would adding grounded aluminum foil between them also be an effective tactic? I don't think I *want* to do this, but I want to check my phyiscal understanding.
Grounded aluminum foil will act as an electrostatic shield. Such shields are used to prevent coupling of electric fields to the wires. The electric fields are usually due to high voltages and/or radio frequency interference. The motor controllers tend to put out more magnetic interference than electric field interference. If you do need an electrostatic shield, you are better off just buying shielded cables. The shield should only be grounded at the receive end i.e. RoboRio.

A combination of separation of the signal and power wires and twisting the power wires around each other and twisting signal wires around each other, if possible, is more effective for preventing coupling of magnetic fields.


Quote:
Originally Posted by s-neff View Post
No, we haven't tried reusing the device, but we did get through a three hour offseason demonstration without fatal CAN errors on the new Talon. So there's a decent chance it was a faulty device. It's on my list to troubleshoot further, and if I can isolate it to the device I'll send it to CTRE.
I have not had to send anything back to CTRE but people who have done so have typically gotten good service.



07-27-2018 02:19 PM

Adam_P


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Hey was looking at the design and it looks awesome overall. However I believe that the slip ring isn't mounted properly.

Check out this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cngf_eyV_l8

It looks like the bottom portion that rotates is inside the module (near the wheels) and the flange is also mounted to this rotating portion. The flange looks like it should be mounted to something that is stationary if that makes sense. If you have seen bomb squad's design, they have a 3d printed mount for the slip ring that mounts to their rotation 775 and is stationary.

Something like this: https://imgur.com/a/HwYs65m



07-27-2018 05:13 PM

justin.chau


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam_P View Post
Hey was looking at the design and it looks awesome overall. However I believe that the slip ring isn't mounted properly.

Check out this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cngf_eyV_l8

It looks like the bottom portion that rotates is inside the module (near the wheels) and the flange is also mounted to this rotating portion. The flange looks like it should be mounted to something that is stationary if that makes sense. If you have seen bomb squad's design, they have a 3d printed mount for the slip ring that mounts to their rotation 775 and is stationary.

Something like this: https://imgur.com/a/HwYs65m

Hm... Thanks for the heads up! Luckily it shouldn't be too hard to modify the design.



07-28-2018 02:13 PM

wgorgen


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam_P View Post
Hey was looking at the design and it looks awesome overall. However I believe that the slip ring isn't mounted properly.

Check out this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cngf_eyV_l8

It looks like the bottom portion that rotates is inside the module (near the wheels) and the flange is also mounted to this rotating portion. The flange looks like it should be mounted to something that is stationary if that makes sense. If you have seen bomb squad's design, they have a 3d printed mount for the slip ring that mounts to their rotation 775 and is stationary.

Something like this: https://imgur.com/a/HwYs65m
I'm kinda surprised that there is not a mechanical connection between the rotating part of the slip ring that you can use to connect it to the rotating part of the module. It just seems like bad practice to use the wires as the mechanical means to spin the slip ring. But it does look like the slip ring is really low friction and the wires are reasonably stiff such that they are not going to twist and fatigue.

But still....

I wonder how easy it would be to find some plastic conduit or pipe or even a 3D printed part that fits around the rotating end of the slip ring. You could cut grooves in the side to let the wires out and then use a band clamp to clamp it to the slip ring and then secure it to the module so that you had a mechanical connection to rotate the slip ring.

I'm probably over thinking it and over complicating it more than it needs to be. But I just don't like the idea of those wires being repeatedly tugged and stressed.



07-29-2018 12:18 AM

Adam_P


Unread Re: pic: Slip Ring Swerve

Quote:
Originally Posted by justin.chau View Post
Hm... Thanks for the heads up! Luckily it shouldn't be too hard to modify the design.
Yeah definitely, no problem.

Full disclosure: have not physically worked with the slip ring. Ive just seen bomb squads module and cad.

Id love to see how the module turns out in competition/on a bot.



view entire thread

Reply
previous
next

Tags

loading ...



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:56 AM.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi