Could you define for me what you mean by carry?
^
The reason he didnāt use bearing flats on the drive, was the axles was supported on both sides by a motor. Also looks like your robot is mostly steel.
I know how he went without bearing flats. We split our motors, with one on each wheel. We only use one bearing flat on each axle, because one side has a motor.
Only the 4 vertical C-channels are steel.
According to the vex product page, steel c channels way more than twice as much as aluminum ones
Also, nuts and screws could be adding to the weight
@Aponthis I see a lot of 1x5 c on that robot. 1x5 weighs ~ twice as much as 1x2 and given that aluminum is 3 times lighter than steel it is effectively adding 6 1x2 aluminum c every time you add one 1x5 steel c.
With 4 1x5 steel c you have added ~ 2.4 lbs to your robot whereas with 4 1x2 aluminum c you would only be adding .6 lbs. So yeahā¦ it adds up quick.
I did some details analysis of the weight of a simple chassis here.
https://vexforum.com/t/robot-drive-sub-systems/26637/1
Wheels can be heavy, structure contributes the most, screws can add a surprising amount of weight.
I did think 8lbs seemed very light but it was an estimate. I think the important thing is a conscious effort was made to reduce weight. It is surprising how quickly things add up especially using pneumatics with .68 lb reservoirs.
Oh no, look what you did @Cameron Schiller - now everyone will abandon their half-done 50 lbs pushbots and start building lightweight clawbots counting the weight of every nylon screw!
Actually, congratulations not only on building such a clean, lean, and mean robot but also on successfully exploring and revealing diametrically opposite concepts. You had catapult, pushbot, and now a clawbot, so the only design left would be a sideroller-intake reverse dumper, capable of holding half of the game objects, and then everybody will be confused which one of those designs to copy. 
So the big question is: what will team 62 take to the worlds?
Let me guess - it got to be lightweight for fast hanging, but pushbot functionality needs a lot of weight for traction. So you will likely collect and carry lots of the game object as a ballast weight. Then you will, naturally, dump them all in the last few seconds and proceed to hanging. However, it is not clear to me if your intake will use siderollers, multiple pneumatic claws, or both.
Joking aside, I will be looking forward for your worlds reveal.
Donāt trust anyone who says their robot is under 10lbs.
under 10 rn not too bad for turbo 4"
Why would you say that?
Were you on team BNS during Nothing But Net season? If I recall correctly its 15" bot was doing amazing skill runs and didnāt look like it was more than 6-8 lbs.
Do you know something we donāt know?
He built the robot that was tiny and minimalist so he would know how heavy a simple basic robot will be.
Haha made me laugh a bit. Yep. We are on the way of trying everything to see what works best.
<3 u owen
Itās a great robot, but thereās no way itās 8lbs. (<3 u too cam)
Cortex = 0.302
Motor = 0.2 * 10 = 2
Tank = 0.68 * 2 = 1.36
Battery = 0.772 * 2 = 1.544
Wheel (4") = 0.232 * 2 = 0.464
Wheel (2.75") = 0.154 * 4 = 0.616
This is already 6.286 before any structure whatsoever. Iām approximating about 15 1x2x35 worth of aluminum c-channel. This would be 0.157 * 15 = 2.355. So that makes 8.641 before adding screws, gears, pistons, solenoids, standoffs, wires, tubes, motor controllers, sensors, etc. In my conservative estimate I got about 9.5lbs, which is still impressive. Itās actually possible it could be under 10lbs, but itās a lot closer to 10 than 8. So maybe I should revise my statement to say under 9lbs.
So either Vexās weights or Camās scale is inaccurate. Or maybe he didnāt count the batteries?
Even the small BNS robots last year were aprox 11-12lbs or more (I need to check with Jordan but the one I built was 13-14 after decking it out in sensors).
Sorry for sounding bitter, it just ticks me a little when weights are thrown around which are actually just guesses based on the fact that a robot is āreally light.ā
Is there any specific reason why you used the L-shaped Angle Bar for your claw instead of a normal c-channel?
The height of the claw is optimised to sit right where the big joint in the star is so that when you close the claw it does a better job of trapping all of the stars. If you use a C channel then you have two points of contact with the stars and you canāt really grip the stars as well.
Ls seem to work better.
Maybe we measured it without batteries or the scale was wrong, honestly I donāt remember. Once I come back to California and have access to my robot I can weigh it again if you want. The point is, its really really light and acts like it.
What I Meant to ask was how much stars can it carry before the arm stalls out.