This will where we are posting our videos we may also monitor this if you have questions about our build
5 Likes
We plan to post our full robot CAD in the next day or two both the version we build and the modified geometry that would make our robot legal.
nice robot, im just wondering if you are able to reach the trap with your intake (since it is relatively close in dimentions to the amp) if you are able to climb in a different way?
also what gear ratio are you running for your intake rotator?
1 Like
The arm reaches up to ~32" above the drivebase, and would be able to score in the trap if the drivebase wheels are 24" off the ground.
The arm gear ratio is 32:1 on two NEO motors, achieved through a 5:1 versaplanetary, 20:60 gear reduction, and a final 15:32 chain reduction.
1 Like
Current Robot CAD:
Our 2024 Robot in 3 Days bot was designed using Solidworks 2023 and the following models are representative of the current state of our robot, Whiplash.
STEP/Parasolid:
Onshape:
Our Code using 2023 WPILib is available on our GitHub, we will also be updating this as we continue to work our bugs and migrate over to 2024 WPILib.
Future Notes:
Our current robot is able to maintain legality by only picking up notes from the source pickup location, as when the arm is moving to the ground intake location is extends outside of the allotted 12 inches from our frame perimeter. We are currently in the process of redesigning the necessary structure and geometry of our robot to allow for the design to be able to legally pickup from the ground as well as maintain the previous functionality of a source pickup, amp score, transfer to shooter, and hook onto the chain. We also are investigating the possibility of a slightly altered arm geometry that would allow for a trap score if an independent climbing system was used. Please stay tuned for more CAD adjustments and redesigns to be posted soon.
3 Likes
Hi! We love your arm architecture (arm-chitecture?) and are thinking about incorporating something similar on our own bot. However, plugging your reduction (and some best guesses) into ReCalc gets me different results than are in the video. Could you help explain what’s going on here? Link to ReCalc.
P.S. I’m a business major, if I got one of these assumptions horribly wrong, let me know!
Did you perhaps mean 10lbs rather than 100?
I’m looking at this for climb, so I was assuming this was for full loaded robot.
Ah gotcha. Most likely then it is higher current limit, everything else looks right to me.
Hi! Thanks for noticing our design and we hope it works well for you!
First thing to mention is that even though our arm is powered by 2 Neos at a 32:1 reduction, we aren’t actually lifting our robot with that power. The actual climbing force is supplied by a 57 Sport Gearbox with a 48:1 reduction and a Neo, this powers the climber-in-a-box winch will pulls on the cross member of the arm. During our design process, we weren’t 100% confident in our arm being able to take the load of our robot and decided to use the winch that we received from Andymark to take the majority of the load. We did briefly look at higher ratios for the arm that would’ve supplied the torque needed, but ultimately the winch provided a better loading case given our timeframe.
That being said, depending on the desired speed of your adaptation of our arm, we’d recommend to start with a ratio closer to 90:1 with a higher current limit. The issue you start to run into is even with an 80A current limit you will be pushing that during the climb and increasing the ratio further will start to make the arm much slower than desired for intake cycling. Hence, the advantage of a separate system to take the load.
Hope that helps!
any update yet on the modified CAD? How about a basic parts list so we can get a jump on ordering materials? We really love everything about this design and hope to make something very close with our small team. Thanks!
We are glad you like our design! We have just posted CAD to the dropbox link with Step and Parasolid files and have the main assembly uploaded to onshape as well. Our arm’s pivot point was moved such that we are within 12" of our frame perimeter at all times. This came at a slight cost to the maximum height that the arm could reach for climbing, but we have positioned the hooks reversed to their original orientation to gain back a couple inches as well as increases the distance the drivetrain can get off the ground. This redesign is an example of how our Robot in 3 Days design can be easily modified to meet the legal requirements while still maintaining full functionality of ground intake, source intake, amp score, transfer to shooter, and climber.
STEP/Parasolid: (Same link as before)
Onshape:
We will also be posting a Robot Detailed Walkthrough / Andymark Sponsorship Debrief video to our youtube channel in the next few days. Please stay tuned for that and let us know any questions you have regarding our design.
2 Likes
My team would also love a basic parts list. We hope to use your design as a starting point for our robot this year!
Hello! Our team was impressed with your design and performance at the FUN competition, but looking at the geometry of your updated CAD model, the arm doesn’t look like it’s able to reach up far enough to throughfeed into the amp like the original design. Was the method of amp scoring intended to be the same as the original in the updated geometry?
1 Like