Thread created automatically to discuss a document in the White Papers.
Team 670 - Universal Drive Systems: Design and Analysis by ChrisCook
I need some feed back on the document.
Does it help your team?
IS it a teaching tool. or is it a “holy book” to base your drive systems.
Please place your comments here, i would really like to hear them
They will help me revise the document and focus the content.
Thanks,
Chris - Team 670
from a quick glance over, it looks like a good starting point for rookies. i personally would add some info on the omni-directional drives (ex. 1083, 1002, 190, 357, etc.) that have been growing more polar in the past years. maybe some info on ackerman steering, and a little content on belt systems. also a list of resources (chiefdelphi.com, NBD whitepaper, andymark.biz, mscdirect.com, etc) might be helpful.
Thanks I wanted to try and get a base for the rookies and the other teams. The main point is to learn. thats why the import thing is to have the teams do the research and learn themselves.
Thanks for the info, I’ll consider adding it in.
Chris,
- Team 670
I sent it to our new members so they can get an idea of the different types of drivetrains that are out there. I think it gives a pretty good overview.
The one thing I don’t agree with is the idea of a universal drive system design that you can reuse every year. I think lots of the fun, joy, and excitement in building of robots (and looking at other robots) comes from the innovation in drive systems. Sure it can be advantageous to the progress of the project to have reusable designs but it is advantageous to the people involved to design something above and beyond.
[quote=sanddrag]I sent it to our new members so they can get an idea of the different types of drivetrains that are out there. I think it gives a pretty good overview.
The one thing I don’t agree with is the idea of a universal drive system design that you can reuse every year. I think lots of the fun, joy, and excitement in building of robots (and looking at other robots) comes from the innovation in drive systems. Sure it can be advantageous to the progress of the project to have reusable designs but it is advantageous to the people involved to design something above and beyond./QUOT
I respect your opinion, but just look at what happened this year. The game didn’t change that much. Team 233, 254, 980, 1097 and numerous others reused heir last years system which enabled them to worry about the arm rather than the robot as a whole. this also allows their team to practice from DAY 1 with the older robot. this eliminates the “sometimes” overwhelming stress of too many concepts, and allows team members to design inside tight restrictions.[/quote]
It all boils down do what do you view as bringing the most success to the team. Placing well in competition, or learning a little something extra and maybe not placing so well.
Reuse a drivetrain, time for practice/programming, place better in competition.
Build a new drivetrain, not as much time for practice/programming, don’t place so well in competition.
Which is more beneficial to the students’ enrichment? Driving practice and programming or drivetrain design/innovation?
There are no definite answers to these questions. It is up to each team’s set of values to determine.
hey i see you used some of my gearboxes in your instruction manual. its nice to see some of my ideas have been used to benefit other teams. this packet was done very well, shows a lot of pros and cons to the many many different drives. like sanddrag said, there are a few more you could add (mecanum, different drives that drop down, etc.) but all in all a really good idea for rookies and new members of your team.
This is a good basic overview of FIRST drive systems. It is a teaching tool to give FIRST teams an idea of some of the basic types of drive systems. However, it is not a “holy book”. Here is some feedback you requested:
Pros:
- Good use of “pros” and “cons”
- Good description of 2, 4, & 6 wheel drive systems
- Good overview of “crab drive” systems
- All aspects are good for new FIRST teams and new members on old FIRST teams to know.
- Pictures are clear and show what is being described well.
Cons:
- Tank tread designs were not mentioned. Many FIRST teams still use treads and belts to drive their robots.
- Omni-directional & holonomic designs are not mentioned (as Roger said previously).
- The designer or the FIRST teams who provided the CAD crab module and the CAD gearboxes MUST be recognized. It is inproper to use these pictures without crediting their designers or the team who provided this design.
- In my opinion, it is good form to give credit to the FIRST teams who introduced a certain technology into FIRST. Team 47 introduced us all to “crab drive” and (I believe) 6-wheel drive designs were introduced and made popular by team 25.
- More detail could be given with regard to competitive speeds, torques, and motor power needed to be successful with these drive trains.
Anytime someone puts their effort out for other teams to see and use, it is great to see. You have done a good job here, Chris, and this can be a great document.
Sincerely,
Andy Baker
cool. my robot is a prime example, thanks
I was impressed with the speed and the efective ness of such a simple manipulator. you guys capped like 12 tets in one round, whcih blew me away.
Thanks for ideas
Team 670
One of the main reasons I wrote this was becasue our team spent 4 weeks just trying to develop a new form of drive system. Closed loop steering using a few sensors. it worked but was not as effective as the tank methods I saw this year.
Another reason i worte this was that teams should not rty and just focus on the robot. they shoudl try and fous on the other team building and GP things that take place at FIRST comp. I feel that the universal drive system enables teams to work with a reliable robot and allows them to consentrate on the real ideals of FIRST.
I thought about adding that in but is just seemed to clutter the document. I might dedicate a document to the motor selection and the applications of each motor, in a format similar to this document.
and I apologize if you were offended when I did not give credit to the original inventors of the 6 wheel and crab drives. There should be a new site where teams can post their robots and give descriptions, so when FIRST comes around, teams can search a database and find what other teams have done.
(FIRSTWIKI meets google)
Thanks for recognition my team’s contribution to this White Paper, we weren’t offended at all since posting a white paper using our design is an honor for us. But that was a very early design for the swivel drive we made.
James
