Just some old pictures of my drive from Skyrise I had laying around. I thought it was an interesting concept so I pursued it. I guess you can consider this a teaser since I’m working on something similar for later on in NbN.
It looks amazing! How much force does the Tank drive configuration have compared to the X-drive?
It was about 25% stronger in torque, but it only reached 40°, so it was weaker when strafing. It still preformed well though. We never pushed in the holonomic configuration and with the motor internals configured for speed it was necessary to have a bit more force vectored forward when driving forward and backward to avoid tripping PTCs. The robot was roughly 23lbs by the end of the season so it was worth the sacrifice of not being able to drive too carelessly.
What was the issue with it not being able to reach the full 45 degrees? We’re the Pistons too short? Did you guys have jamming issues with the slides?
The pistons were too short. This is the configuration I had before I had to share pistons with other teams. Using 4 allowed it to reach the full 45° in less than the full stroke of each piston.
Is that a transmission within an X-drive?
Yes. The change in angle from tank to holonomic acts as an effective transmission, changing the way force is vectored so that it can be both maneuverable and powerful.
That’s a very very very sweet shifting x drive. And it appears to eliminate the flimsiness that’s common in shifting x drives.
Personally, seeing a lot of linear slider mechanisms neatly packed together and activated by pneumatic pistons really turn me on. lol
Why thank you. I like me some sliders myself.
I myself love the design. But as with every design i think it will have it’s draw backs: How heavy is this will the extra weight make it burn out?, this also is very space consuming which may be a hinderance in some designs. Just some thoughts, I do love your design though.
Because of the height of the lifts in Skyrise, I wanted a lower center of mass so that the robot wouldn’t tip at 6’3". The space wasn’t an issue because I used a needle intake that sat at the very edge of the size restriction and always stayed several inches away from the chassis. The motors never overheated in a match, although they did several times during long practices. It was a good fit for the design I had and treated me well last season.
I was thinking more if you used this design this year.
This year the challenge is different, and thus the drive will be different. I don’t plan on doing anything like this except for maybe the force vectoring used to shift it.
At the beginning of this thread you said
So I think that’s where the confusion came from. It sounded like you were going to use this drive concept again.
Sorry for the confusion. But just to clarify:
I meant that I was going to do something similar with the drive. Tot this exact configuration, not the same angles, not the same ratio, not the same number of pistons, not the same pivot points. This is its own distinct drive and so is my new one. Just giving some little hints.