CADathon Team 345's 1678 CADathon Robot Submission: Amber

345 would like to present and release our newest robot, Amber!

We were super happy to see Amber placed at 7th in the very first 1678 CADathon!

  • Submitted a very high-detail CAD model including wires and decals and nearly every fastener including spacers, rivets, threads, nuts, and bolts
  • Entire spreadsheets explaining our Strategic Design decisions and Strategy Calculations (including a way of predicting real world cycle times that we created in the InspireNC #4 CADathon, but unfortunately they have been unable to release the results from that so the release will be pending on that)
  • A Fabrication sheet for every part w/ what stock is used to create it, what machines, and how many operations
  • And a Robot Tracking sheet for tracking what motors drew what amperage w/ ratios, PDP, PCM, and Manifold assignments

Although massive shout outs to 1678 and FUN for coordinating this CADathon. It was a ton of fun to CAD for, and we hope that maybe in the future we will see another 1678 CADathon!!! :))

More information about our robot can be found in the documents below, thanks for reading! :slight_smile:
Tech Binder:
Submission Sheet:
Strategic Calculations:
Robot Tracking:
Fabrication Sheet:


Why did you choose the Neo 550s over the Falcon 500s? In our team’s experience the torque outputted by 550s was super low and they burned out even on a turret, I wouldn’t trust them on the rotation of swerve modules that have the whole robot’s weight on them.

I’d argue the NEO550 is a perfect use for a swerve steering motor (from word of mouth mind you, no first hand experience with swerve here). I have seen many modules use one in their design (Have a look at the thrifty swerve for an example of a commercially available unit using one). If I recall, Banebot 550’s used to be an excellent option too, with only 200W of peak power (compared to the NEO550’s ~280W).

What conditions were your NEO550’s being used in (gearing, load, current limiting)? We used a NEO550 on our turret last year and absolutely loved it’s packaging and performance!

We’ve been able to gain feedback from other teams and it’s all about the ratio your putting onto them. It packages better with a cheaper motor and if anything went wrong down there I rather swap out a $25 motor than a $140 motor. I know it’s a bit hypocritical to say that with a Falcon 500 driving it but the Falcon is just more efficient that the Rev NEOs are and offer more power. For turning I suppose I didn’t really see the need to use that extra power I could just put more reduction on it.

I think the ratio ended up being 14.38:1 and current draw of 11.27a when in use with a stall of 10.14%. I would’ve liked closer to 30:1 but I thought it would be fine. The robot during the match would never be doing much while driving/steering anyways but it still would’ve been nice to have time to beef up that ratio.