What advantages might V5 have over the old electronics that they would lessen the amount of motors?
I mean they’re supposed to be 2 or 3 times as powerful…
They’re stronger, like 2x or 2.5x stronger so you can do more with less.
Not to mention the obvious control system advantages
I will be waiting to see if a 2 motor drivetrain is powerful enough.
They dwarf the capabilities of the 393s
That’s simple: to discourage wasting 6 of them on the drivebase.
They are significantly more powerful, so the teams staying with cortex would be at a significant disadvantage and the official narrative is to allow for a reasonably fair transition period.
(Though I did expect the new game to have much less emphasis on the camera to be really fair. But the flags are very obvious multicolor targets, optimized for the recognition)
I think they’re just trying to sell the cameras as a ‘necessary’ element for each robot.
I expect that once the cortex system is phased out (or at least mostly), the number of V5 motors will likely increase. They couldn’t have more than 12 motors for the old system, so the only way to equally balance the old system with V5 was to reduce the number of motors for V5.
True, but it would take some serious programming to really benefit from using the camera in that way though. If you’re going to shoot at the flags from a set location, the camera is useless. The camera could be used to automatically align with and adjust a launcher’s parameter(s) (like angular speed for a flywheel), but you would need to determine, at minimum:
- The distance to a flag based on its height and width in the camera’s view
- The horizontal and vertical angles to the flag relative to the launcher
- A model for your launcher’s parameter(s) in terms of the aforementioned values
With a good robot position tracking system (such as encoders on free-spinning wheels), you could achieve the exact same thing, with the one exception being the ability to automatically discern the color of flags.
@puppy333 While at worlds, there was a V5 display showing what V5 could do, mechanical and software wise. But while there, I overheard the guy who made the display robot talking to another guy about making the robot, and he said thta they initially tried to make the robot with a 2 motor drive, but the acceleration was too slow, and so they were forced to make the robot with 4 motor drive. Btw the robot was a drive with a dr4b and claw, so idk idk if u made a lighter robot if it could work. Hope this helps.
Jeremiah, that was my robot. What I tell people is that the 2-motor robot worked fine, but that 4 motors showed great acceleration. If that was a competition robot I would have left it at 2 motors. Sorry for the confusion.
Also, Harvey is driven 5-6 hours a day by random people. He lives a hard life. I doubt many teams use the same robot with the same parts for 40 hours of continuous operation. Except for one plastic gear, nothing has broken. I love V5.
I agree with Rick. We built a two-motor drive robot with a DR4B and claw and it was lickety split. We had geared it up to 2:1 and took it to a Pi Night at a local elementary school. It drove so fast that we had to reduce the gearing to 1:1 in order for the kids to be able to reasonably control it. All that to say, two V5 motors on a drive base should be more than sufficient.
@levipope So can I make my 2-motor 5:1 drivebase video public yet?
@Gear Geeks was this at the 200 RPM or 100 RPM setting?
Yes you are good to go.
100 RPM (I think). It’s at home right now but I’ll look later and update if I am wrong.
Harvey has 200 gears geared up 5:3, which is about 340 RPM at the 3.25" wheels.
OK, 2 motor, 5:1, plenty of space (i have sacrificed those wheels in the name of science)
I know it is a very lightweight robot, so the next one we already have built is steel drivebase and strong high RD4B on top.
Not to mention there are no partner controllers for V5…
There isn’t a specialized partner joystick, but you can link up two V5 controllers to each other to serve the same function.