The mismatched wheel is actually what solved some of the in taking issues for us. We did some other geometry changes as well but that was what finally let the cube spin in to place so nicely. The real intake will likely have 2 mismatched wheels we just haven’t tested in taking from the other side yet.
I see the pneumatic cylinders on the intake, but it appears as though when you’re intaking a cube you’re approaching it with the intake “closed”. If I’m seeing things correctly the cylinders could effectively be swapped out for springs.
Am I missing something?
If not, what advantage does pneumatics give you vs. springs, and is that advantage worth the extra weight?
The intake also has to drop off cubes and a pneumatic release can possibly do that cleaner than a spring. Especially if we need to shoot the cube and have the wheels quickly move away from the side of the cube.
The cylinders allow us to adjust compression using a regulator. It’s also possible to have multiple pressures with a shuttle value as per the Q&A this year, so one pressure for intaking and one pressure for holding tight to the cube.
Why not just utilize one sensor and look at the current being applied through CAN? Once you hit stall, you should effectively be in possession of a game piece. (Unless your robot is driving against a wall trying to pick up the field borders.)
That is an option as well, we used current sensing to know we had the gears last year. The intake doesn’t really completely stall though and I’m pretty sure if we got it wrong the Fairlane wheels could possibly rip the fabric (we haven’t done it yet) so we want to be sure that isn’t a problem.
We haven’t graphed current during the intaking yet to know if it will only have a current spike once we completely have a cube. It could spike during peak compression as the intake goes around the cube corner.
Current is an option and one I like but it may not be the best option, more prototypes and testing are needed before we know for sure.