Difference between revisions of "3-Wheel Swerve"
From DEW Robotics
MaiKangWei (talk | contribs) |
MaiKangWei (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The 2013 change in perimeter rules (112 in overall perimeter vis-à-vis 28in x 38 in) open new potentials for non-rectangular robots. The team decided to explore this. | The 2013 change in perimeter rules (112 in overall perimeter vis-à-vis 28in x 38 in) open new potentials for non-rectangular robots. The team decided to explore this. | ||
− | [[image: | + | [[image:Tribot111c.gif|500px|right|thumb|Equalateral triangle design]]In particular, the new rules enable the design of a 3-wheeled robot without paying as large a penalty in terms of reduced stability. Potential benefits of a 3-wheeled drive-train are reduced drive-train and chassis weight, and/or a drive-train with enhanced features (which might otherwise been impractical due to drive-train weight). Additionally, a 3-wheeled swerve robot reduce burden on the cRIO. A tiangular chassis robot may be able to break a blockage by opposing robots more seasily than a rectangular chassis robot due to the reduced corner angle. |
[[image:Tribot_130711_csm.jpg|500px|right|thumb|Pentagonal prototype]] | [[image:Tribot_130711_csm.jpg|500px|right|thumb|Pentagonal prototype]] |
Revision as of 01:00, 16 July 2013
The 2013 change in perimeter rules (112 in overall perimeter vis-à-vis 28in x 38 in) open new potentials for non-rectangular robots. The team decided to explore this.
In particular, the new rules enable the design of a 3-wheeled robot without paying as large a penalty in terms of reduced stability. Potential benefits of a 3-wheeled drive-train are reduced drive-train and chassis weight, and/or a drive-train with enhanced features (which might otherwise been impractical due to drive-train weight). Additionally, a 3-wheeled swerve robot reduce burden on the cRIO. A tiangular chassis robot may be able to break a blockage by opposing robots more seasily than a rectangular chassis robot due to the reduced corner angle.