paper: Cyber Blue 234 Drive System Test - Performance and Power

Thanks for posting the data. This information is very handy to know.

Just a quick thought regarding the 4 CIM + 2 Mini CIM test outperforming the 6 CIM test:
When I look at your battery voltage plots on pages 8 (single robot) and 14 (pushing), I see that your battery voltage on the 4+2 starts out higher than the 6, and the 4+2 voltage does not droop as low as the 6 initially, when the motors are in a stall situation. This is happening despite the higher measured current draw of the 4+2 system than the 6 system. I do see that you listed battery voltage as a variable that changed with each test. Do you think it is possible that the battery could have been in a higher charge state (and thus able to supply more power to the system) in the 4+2 test than in the 6 test? Is this difference significant enough that it could cause the 4+2 test to outperform the 6 test?

I would like to see the code you used for the data logging. Were looking into doing similar testing and sample code would save us a lot of time.

We captured the data from the control, which is output as a .csv file, then opened it with Excel. All of the analysis and plots are Excel.

I can get more details on the data logging if that is helpful.

I’d like to see some 775 Pro testing. We are intrigued by their capabilities and would consider using them in our drive train.

http://motors.vex.com/cim-motor

Comparing the peak power and stall torque graphs will give some insight into why CIMs are preferred over high-speed-fan-cooled motors for drivetrain.