QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!!

Posted by Andy Grady.

Other on team in limbo from in limbo sponsored by in limbo.

Posted on 10/29/2000 8:45 AM MST

Hi all, here is this weeks question:

Question 10/29/00: What do you think of last years pneumatics? (sp.) What changes if any should be made with them for next year? What about the possibility of hydrolics? (is this even possible)

Posted by nick237.

Engineer on team #237, sie h2o bots, from Watertown high school ct and sieman co.

Posted on 10/29/2000 9:33 AM MST

In Reply to: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!! posted by Andy Grady on 10/29/2000 8:45 AM MST:

We used pneumatics in a limited capacity in 1999 but we quickly realised the weight to benifit ratio made
the use of pneumatics a waste of space, we didnt try to remove weight by drilling holes in the air tank but im sure some teams had limited success with this idea. So FIRST should dump the idea of pneumatics.
Hydraulics would cause a whole world of problems such as leaks on the fields and the pit area not to mention leaks on the electronics in the Robots. weight would also be another problem unless one could drill holes in the hoses or use a light weigh oil fluid?.
Nick Team 237

: Hi all, here is this weeks question:

: Question 10/29/00: What do you think of last years pneumatics? (sp.) What changes if any should be made with them for next year? What about the possibility of hydrolics? (is this even possible)

Posted by colleen.   [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]

Coach on team #246, Blue Light Special, from John D. O’Byrant High School/Boston Latin Academy and NSTAR/Boston University/UTC/Raytheon/MassPEP.

Posted on 10/29/2000 10:33 AM MST

In Reply to: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!! posted by Andy Grady on 10/29/2000 8:45 AM MST:

i think in terms of pneumatics, that tank was a little big and most teams didn’t use it-- for most, it was probably a waste of some expensive equipment because they didn’t want to take up that much room for a little suction-- they were cool, but need to be more size efficient for more teams to use it…

i think hydraulics would be cool-- and i think it’s VERY likely we see them if not this year, but in the near future–

Just from the Team Forum, one of the help guides FIRST listed as they were going to make was the ‘Fluid Power Guide’-- maybe it’s just to play with our heads… but why not??

Hydraulics are a good source of power… and maybe everyone’s a little afraid of water… but that would be a heck of a cool challenge–

Posted by Rod Prather.

Engineer on team #234, Cyber Blue, from Perry Meridian High School and Rolls Royce.

Posted on 10/29/2000 5:40 PM MST

In Reply to: Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!! posted by colleen on 10/29/2000 10:33 AM MST:

As far as hydraulics goes, take it from someone who works with hydraulics, it’s messy and smelly. You will always have leaks somewhere. We don’t need oil on the field or the carpet and we don’t want the students smelling of hydraulic oil. Hydraulics is also more expensive and has a new level of safety involved due to the pressures and applied forces. Water won’t work, no lubrication. Pneumatics teaches the same principles. I would vote against hydraulics. If I had a vote, which I don’t.

As far as the Fluid Power Guide goes, remember that gas (air) is considered to be a fluid in the field of fluidics. Gases and liquids respond very similarly in a power system or a carrier (a tube) and are applied using the same mathematics. The viscosity is the primary difference. Therefore, the Fluid Power Guide applies to pneumatics as well as hydraulics and was probably recommended because of the use of pneumatics in First robots.

: i think hydraulics would be cool-- and i think it’s VERY likely we see them if not this year, but in the near future–

: Just from the Team Forum, one of the help guides FIRST listed as they were going to make was the ‘Fluid Power Guide’-- maybe it’s just to play with our heads… but why not??

: Hydraulics are a good source of power… and maybe everyone’s a little afraid of water… but that would be a heck of a cool challenge–

Posted by Erin.   [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]

Other on team #1, ., from alumni of the juggernauts and …

Posted on 10/29/2000 1:16 PM MST

In Reply to: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!! posted by Andy Grady on 10/29/2000 8:45 AM MST:

Hydraulics:
Cheaper (to SOME extent), messier, larger, and sometimes more complicated…

Pneumatics:
More expensive (SMC however gives us quality parts), cleaner, smaller, and I find them to be easier (esp. schematic wise)… plus air is alot easier to deal with than hydraulic fluid…that stuff does not come off of clothes. And hydraulics take more pressure to actually get working- I don’t think it is possible.

Last year, I liked the pneumatics in the kit- however, I think there needs to be a way so that more teams would utilize them- seriously, out of how many robots, how many used the pneumatics and used them effectively??? More is going into the mechanics rather than the fluid power aspect of design and build.
I think the whole pneumatic/fluid power componentry in the kit could be improved.
-erin

Posted by Splash.

Other on team #53, Team Inferno, from U of M and NASA GSFC.

Posted on 10/29/2000 4:36 PM MST

In Reply to: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!! posted by Andy Grady on 10/29/2000 8:45 AM MST:

Last year, the tanks came late, as I hear, most of them had leaks so that you weren’t able to test them before competition and therefore many teams scrapped the idea. The tank was huge and if you wanted to use it, you had to build around it. I like the possibilities with pneumatics, just not with that tank.

Posted by Michael Martus.   [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]

Coach on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central H.S. and Delphi Automotives Systems.

Posted on 10/29/2000 5:10 PM MST

In Reply to: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!! posted by Andy Grady on 10/29/2000 8:45 AM MST:

We have included Pneumatics in the kit used for the Chief Delphi Invitational the last two years. Several teams used them very well.

There is no tank, but 4 pumps that can be run in series that produce a good flow of air supply to small small cylinders to do a task like clamping.

Forget the tank, to large, to heavy and a general inconvience to use.

Hydraulics …NO WAY. A phrase used in a class I took at Vickers comes to mind P.S.O., this means pressure squirting out. What a mess it would make if a fitting started to leak. There goes the traction.

Posted by Raul.   [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]

Engineer on team #111, Wildstang, from Rolling Meadows & Wheeling HS and Motorola.

Posted on 10/30/2000 11:08 AM MST

In Reply to: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!! posted by Andy Grady on 10/29/2000 8:45 AM MST:

The problem with pnuematics is that it is hard to justify the power to weight ratio when making a decision whether or not to use them. If FIRST wants to encourage us to use them, they should make a weight consession to teams that use them.

I suggest they deduct the weight of the major pneumatic components from your final weight. During inspection, each team can show their list of pneumatic components to the inspectors and their (predetermined) weight would be subtracted from your official weight. That means that your robot could weight more than normal if you use pneumatics.

Battlebots does this for walking robots to encourage builders to use that type of technology.

Or, at least they should have an award for the best use of pneumatics.

Without any incentives (or other design restrictions - which I prefer not to have), most engineers would choose to use the more compact (weight efficient) forms of producing, transfering, controling and converting motion/energy/power.

BTW, did anyone ever calculate the power rating of the cylinders (max pressure x max flow rate)?

Raul