If using a motor for the indexer you should probably ratchet it to another mechanism, because there is so much more power from the motor tht could still be used.
That’s what I meant by the 1 motor for the indexer and geared to the intake. Both motors will be active for intaking and the indexer will be inactive when spinning one way. If the indexing motor spins the other way, the intake will run reverse and the indexer will push the discs into the flywheel.
Or maybe even better would be building a differential so you can power a fly wheel and use the indexer with the same motor, this could solve your problem with motor distrbution.
I got 100 actuations that are able to push a disk from a single acting pistons on two reservoirs
I’ll have to look into that. I’ve never actually built one before, and I don’t really understand the mechanics quite yet. Thanks for the guidance.
If anyone wants to try sharing motors with ratchets, you may want to study these classic reveals:
It should be relatively easy to have a single motor flywheel and then another motor to power both intake and indexer.
If you need to have one extra function (like an angle changer) and somehow share it with flywheel motor, it should be possible too, but you may run into tricky control issues. I would just leave flywheel motor alone to make it easier to control its speed precisely and reliably.
ill build an example of this today and post it here for you! I feel like this would be a good option with the way you plan to distribute your motors.
Here is the differential I made. It’s very poorly built, but still shows how the design works.
Video of Differential
You may have to download the video at the top right.
When both motors are spinning at the same speed in the same direction the indexer remains still.
When you raise or lower the speed of the indexing motor it will move, but all while still giving exra power to the flywheel.
I’ve got a question for those of you who received your field elements already. How sturdy is the high goal? If an aluminum bot were to climb it, would it brake? Does anyone know if that action would deemed illegal?
… 20 characters …
The goals themselves are held in by some PVC pipe and the same piece that the goals from tipping point had (the circular one that you tighten similar to a shaft collar). I’m a little concerned for the longevity of these pieces, and although I doubt a disc will be thrown with enough force to knock it down, theyre secured to the point where theyre able to spin in place (assuming i set them up correctly). Pictures below
Also a little skeptical about the durability of the rollers, as the “ratcheting” mechanism is just a gear with resistance from some rubber
The rubber ratcheting piece is designed to be rotated as it wears to keep it fresh, but yes on a practice field in your shop I think you may wear it out over the season. I think it was brought up elsewhere, but there is also interference between the bolt head through the roller and the “pointers”.
This is probably a stupid question but, 2 motor 2 wheel or 2 motor 1 wheel?
as long as you don’t touch the low goal’s 2d plan, you can still expand up 2 inches, which could be used to hook onto one of the bars.
I am just curious, even though I’m not on a team anymore. My idea was that a bot could climb and hug the high goal until the last 10 seconds. If the expansion thing would be an issue, the bot would have a one-shot puncher mechanism on the bottom that makes it jump to reach the bars. Such a design might only require 2 drive motors, or even one, leaving the rest for climbing and endgame expansion. This definitely wouldn’t be a meta, but it’s these wacky designs that keep things interesting
Somebody please make this and PM me with how it turns out.
part b of SG5 makes me think that this is a no-go either way, since it has mentions of a ‘virtual ceiling’.
Maybe use the vertical expansion to hit the bottom of the high goal with a lot of force to descore discs…
No, stop it, please.
Vertical expansion is limited to 24"
Bottom of high goal is 25"
There is no way to descore high goal
This idea is stupid
please stop im tired of seeing this
or instead of saying this in this fashion, say, “it is impossible by the standards set by the rules, blah blah blah 24 inch vertical blah blah blah bottom goal 25 inches” no idea is stupid. people just need to pay more attention to the rules.
the edit was just fixing a misspell