Difference between revisions of "DEWBOT VII Drive Train"
MaiKangWei (talk | contribs) (→Pivot developments since the 2010 season) |
MaiKangWei (talk | contribs) (→Pivot developments since the 2010 season) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
==Pivot developments since the 2010 season== | ==Pivot developments since the 2010 season== | ||
| − | [[image:WM_01.jpg|300px|right|thumb|[[media:1640_Pivot_Drive_Wooden_Man_101128.pdf | "Wooden Man"]] pivot module design]] 2010 was 1640's first season using Pivot Drive. On the whole, the experience was very satisfactory, but there were some improvements which we identified as important. These were: | + | [[image:WM_01.jpg|300px|right|thumb|[[media:1640_Pivot_Drive_Wooden_Man_101128.pdf | "Wooden Man"]] pivot module design]] [[DEWBOT VI Drive Train|2010 was 1640's first season using Pivot Drive]]. On the whole, the experience was very satisfactory, but there were some improvements which we identified as important. These were: |
:# The joint between the pivot top and pivot tube failed on two occassions. This needs to be made more reliable. | :# The joint between the pivot top and pivot tube failed on two occassions. This needs to be made more reliable. | ||
:# The time required to change a pivot if it fails is too long. This needs to be reduced to 5 minutes. | :# The time required to change a pivot if it fails is too long. This needs to be reduced to 5 minutes. | ||
Revision as of 22:31, 18 February 2011
January 10th 2011: The big debate of the night The Drive Train. Pivot vs. Tank (6W)
Probably one of the most important decision to make for the robot. There were many pros and cons for both sides. Do you continue with the drive train you used last year, with the increased knowledge on how to build, program and drive it, and the added agility that come with but lose the 8 motors it takes and the amount of processor resources it will eat up?
Or...
Do you go with a simpler design, with can be created quickly, anyone can drive, uses less motors and processor, and can leave more time for working other aspects of the robot. However with this, sacrifice the maneuverability of the other option. While everyones input was listened to, the two main groups that needed to answer this were our drivers and our programmers.
The winner: Pivot, Our programmers and drivers were confident in their skills it may seem as a higher risk but will definitely yield a higher reward. We decided to go with what was our most valuable asset last year, agility. We were the fastest most agile Bot out there. This season is certainly shaping up to be a challenging one indeed.
Pivot developments since the 2010 season
- The joint between the pivot top and pivot tube failed on two occassions. This needs to be made more reliable.
- The time required to change a pivot if it fails is too long. This needs to be reduced to 5 minutes.
- Setscrews loosen, and as a result the transfer axle tended to drift. A redesign is needed to prevent drift without reliance on set screws.
- Weight reduction.
On 22-Nov, the team ran a Value Engineering session on the 2010 Pivot Drive design, which included a "Straw Man" proposal for a modular Pivot Unit. With a modular Pivot Unit, pivot replacement during a competition would entail module replacement, with the module including the drive and steering motors and the angle sensor.
Based on the feedback received on the "Straw Man", an improved "Wooden Man" (pdf) design was developed to elicit further critique. This "Wooden Man" design provided the starting point for the 2011 pivot drive design.
Strengthening the Pivot Top / Pivot Tube Joint
The 2010 pivot design utilized a tight fit between the hole in the pivot top and the inserted pivot tube. The insertion depth was 3/8". the joint was epoxied and three 8-32 set screws were threaded into the joint at 120° intervals to strengthen the joint and prevent rotation. (6) such pivots were produces in 2010 (4 for use and 2 spares). Two failed in service (during off-season competitions). Pivots which failed in this way could not be repaired.
The 2011 pivot addresses this deficiency by:
- The insertion depth is is increased to 1/2".
- A thermal interference fit between the pivot top hole and pivot tube is employed. The hole is undersized by 0.0025". Prior to assembly, the pivot tops are heated to 450°F to expand the hole enough to allow the tube to fit. Assembly must be done quickly!
Torture testing shows the new joints to be very strong (we haven't been able to break them).
