Fiberglass and aluminum offer different advantages for robot chassis construction. Fiberglass is lightweight and strong but can be brittle under heavy impacts and is generally harder to work with. Aluminum , on the other hand, is more durable, impact-resistant, and easier to fabricate, though it’s slightly heavier. While aluminum is preferred for durability and longevity, fiberglass is useful for lightweight and more intricate parts. Both materials can be combined for an optimal chassis design. So, which one is more logical to use for the chassis?
Golden Rule: use a drivetrain known to you
Unless you have the capability to do extensive testing with a fiberglass chassis, I would suggest that an aluminum chassis is the logical choice.
There may be other{1} places on a robot where fiberglass could make sense, but between alternatives like 3-D printing, Carbon Fiber, and just polycarb sheets, I would guess that is a rather small design space. Probably not enough for most teams to invest their time / money / headspace / etc.
{1} for example, I am assuming it is more radio-transparent
13 Likes
Fiberglass can be hard to repair quickly, and having been covered head to toe in the dust, I really can’t recommend the stuff.
Also, for district teams like us, if you can’t fix it in a high school cafeteria, don’t do it.
4 Likes
Fiberglass offers a great strength-to-weight ratio , making it lightweight yet durable. It’s flexible, so it can absorb impacts without cracking, which can be helpful in certain situations. Additionally, fiberglass is often cheaper than aluminum, making it a good option for teams on a budget. It’s also easier to work with and can be molded into custom shapes. Finally, its radio transparency makes it a solid choice for parts that need to avoid electromagnetic interference. Overall, fiberglass can be a practical, cost-effective choice for specific chassis designs.
If you prepare it in advance and drill the holes, all you need to do is remove the screw, replace it, and screw it back in, just like with aluminum.
Pardon my bluntness, but to my ears this sounds quite a bit like an advertisement from someone selling fiberglass. If this is the case, please be upfront with disclosure, if not, my apologies.
17 Likes
More likely AI generated. Please, folks, don’t just dump AI responses into replies. They almost never add value to the discussion.
33 Likes
… someTHING selling ….
(Thanks for the correction)
Setting aside the seeming AI generated response…
Here are some historical examples (Ignore the bit on 3D printing most teams were still struggling with it in 2020):
5 Likes
I’m sorry but I am not selling something. This is my first year at FRC and I just thought it would make sense to use fiberglass in the chassis and sent this question to Chiefdelphi.
1 Like
I am from Turkey and sometimes l make grammar mistakes in English. That’s why I used ai.
4 Likes
I generally would not recommend fiberglass for this application. I have done a fair amount of marine fiberglass work, both traditional layup and reinforcement with pultruded stock.
Carbon fiber composites have seen limited use in FRC. The best examples in recent years have been limited to off-the-shelf shapes, replaceable whole in the event of failure. See 254’s tech binders for the past several years.
- when FRPs (fiberglass-reinforced plastics) break, they do so without plastic deformation; you don’t generally get a shot to finish the match in degraded state (i.e., your chassis wouldn’t be bent; it’d be cracked in half)
- broken FRP is sharp and might injure you on the way back to the pit
- FRPs are anisotropic; you have to take into account the fiber direction, whereas aluminum is mostly isotropic (i.e., same characteristics in all directions)
- FRPs require reinforcement around fastener holes and other stress risers; see 254’s challenges with their 2023 laterator (CFRP has similar concerns)
- making repairs at competition is limited by R203K (hazardous materials may not be machined at an event); you can’t drill a new hole, for instance
- epoxy takes too long to reach full strength for use at an event, and even if you had time, you wouldn’t be allowed to do the necessary surface preparation (i.e., sanding)
10 Likes
What if we use 3-4 layers of fiberglass ? And aren’t we allowed to take spare chassis.
These questions rarely have “yes or no” answers.
It is certainly possible to use composites in FRC. The Carbon Knights, 3669, do it every year, and they always have interesting designs to show. They also have several expert mentors to teach it, years of practice, a shop full of specialized equipment, and a safety regimen that fits the material.
I think it would be cool if more FRC teams would experiment with composites, if they have those four things, at least in limited amounts, and if they develop the whole program at least a year in advance. If not, then IMHO it’s likely to be a bad time at best and a toxic hazard at worst.
2 Likes
Thanks
For this reason alone, you absolutely should not use fiberglass - use tried and true construction techniques and materials to build a solid and reliable robot.
Doing research later is fine but don’t make this sort of bet right away.
While it might seem that fiberglass is cheaper than aluminum extrusions, the cost of learning to do this in a reliable and accurate way is not without substantial cost. You would almost certainly make many parts, many times.
7 Likes
So far, a lot of AI sounds a pretty much like a deceitful used car salesman trying to convince you that his junker is a chariot of the gods. [I’m hoping this example crosses cultural lines]
Anyway, I’d recommend just using a language translator like at Google.
—— how did it do? ———
Şu ana kadar yapay zekanın çoğu, sizi hurdacısının tanrıların arabası olduğuna ikna etmeye çalışan hilekar bir kullanılmış araba satıcısına benziyor. [Bu örneğin kültürel sınırları aştığını umuyorum]
2 Likes
After this I’m going to use google translate :))
