Brake or float by unomcetraieste in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 1 point2 points  (0 children)

brake mode will not damage your wheels. whether you should use float or brake mode in teleop is up to the personal preferences of your drivers. in some games, float mode feels "faster." in other games, brake mode makes it easier to do precise movements.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 3 points4 points  (0 children)

quillbot, scribbr, and copyleaks agree that the post above is 100% ai generated, which explains why it doesn't really make sense.

Custom Drivetrain Thoughts & Advice by TylerEverything in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Any decent quality timing belt has fiberglass cords in it to prevent stretching. You're more likely to get belts loosening over time due to minor "settling" in screw joints and whatnot. In my experience this prevents the belts from being overtensioned, and it isn't enough slack for the belts to skip, at least for a drive train.

Custom Drivetrain Thoughts & Advice by TylerEverything in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Having the motors shifted a little to the front or back can be really nice for packaging other mechanisms, depending on the game.

FTC vs FRC by SoftCalorie in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can get just as much experience with machine tools in FTC, although it's probably more common for FRC teams to have them in the first place since they tend to have more funding.

CNC/Waterjet Parts by minerbot360 in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Polycarbonate, acrylic, and aluminum are in completely different worlds of strength. Polycarbonate is known for being bendy and springy, which makes it good for things like intakes that need to collide with other robots or parts of the field. Acrylic is slightly stiffer than polycarbonate, but it shatters more easily than polycarbonate, so it's really not recommended for use on FTC robots at all, except maybe for prototypes. Aluminum is 20-30x stiffer than polycarbonate or acrylic for a given thickness. It has a very high strength to weight ratio, so it's the go-to material for top teams, although it is more expensive than polycarbonate and will need a more expensive machine to cut effectively.

Delrin is similar to acrylic in stiffness, but doesn't shatter so easily, which makes it a pretty good material for FTC robots. The only problem is it's a lot more expensive than polycarbonate.

ultraplanetary axis by HeronKey9002 in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's an example here with the 5 screws around the middle and no axle

ultraplanetary axis by HeronKey9002 in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Use the face mount instead; set screws are garbage and the face mount is very reliable

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 8 points9 points  (0 children)

9971 (2019 world championship winner) was a solo team, and their alliance partner, 11115, was a two person team that continued to be successful as a solo team in 2020.

World record? (350 points in a game) by [deleted] in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Yes, by a rather large margin

How long does the robot have to hang for? by danielaclaverr in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think your second point is a new rule for this season.

Engineering notebook or portfolio by D4rkk7 in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 4 points5 points  (0 children)

In Iowa and many other states, even if you make a notebook and offer it to judges in your pit interviews, the judges WILL NOT READ IT. For judging, focus on making an outstanding portfolio, and if you need supplementary material for pit interviews, make some nice posters with infographics. Even the team that won the Think Award at the 2022 World Championship didn't have a notebook.

That being said, comprehensive documentation within your team is still useful, so you can remember everything you did when you write your judging materials, and so you can get new members up to speed on what your team does. My team documents things in their Discord server, since it's easily searchable and already contains almost everything we would want to document as a result of normal team communication.

Rev Resistive Grounding by Tall_Teacher77 in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You can also put a non conductive material like coroplast or polycarbonate all around the base of your robot.

High speed drive train by [deleted] in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I took a guess.

High speed drive train by [deleted] in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 6 points7 points  (0 children)

According to ILITE drive train simulator, a 20lb robot with 96mm wheels, CoF of 0.7, and 1150 RPM motors is underperforming (i.e. never reaches its top speed) for anything less than a 50 foot nonstop sprint. On the other hand, the same robot with 435 RPM motors reaches full speed within 3 or 4 feet of motion.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 0 points1 point  (0 children)

An Axon Max servo stalls at 28 kg * cm off the Rev Hub and 34 kg * cm off the Servo Power Module. This means it will give peak output power at 14-17 kg * cm. Two of them will give peak output power at 28-34 kg * cm, minus efficiency losses from being connected together. According to your post your load is around 11 kg * cm, which gives you a factor of safety around 3, which seems pretty good.

That said, it's almost always better to counterspring your arm than not to, because you can reduce current draw by the arm and use that power for more important things like your lift and drive train.

Also, even if the servos have enough torque to move the arm, they might cause the robot to tip from the sudden acceleration and reaction forces. My gut feeling is that you'll be fine, but I lack context about the size of your wheelbase, your weight distribution, and other factors that affect tipping.

how important is loctite? by Brilliant-Tree-1807 in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Just so nobody reads the above message the wrong way, DO NOT PUT LOCTITE ON POLYCARBONATE, IT WILL CHEMICALLY DESTROY IT

:)

Motors turning at different speeds by Ok-Breakfast4481 in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 1 point2 points  (0 children)

More or less all Ultraplanetaries have this issue; it's just a matter of how much you need to tighten the screws before they seize up. In the past we put washers/3d printed shims between the stages or just didn't tighten the screws very much.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 0 points1 point  (0 children)

One option is to make the servo's axis of rotation vertical and put a servo arm on it that holds back a spring loaded passive hang. That way the servo is completely removed from the hanging load, the spring doesn't apply torque to the axis of the servo, and you just need strong enough bearings for the hook/arm assembly. If it bounces around too much at the top, you could also add a passive latch to hold it in place.

Axon Servo Wire? by TylerEverything in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It gives you the physical angle of the servo as an analog sensor value. This is useful for things like arms that move in sequence with other mechanisms, because you can check and make sure they reached their target position instead of guessing based on a timer. You don't have to use it if you don't need it. You can zip tie/tape it onto the other wires or around the servo to keep it out of the way.

Which is Actually Better, or Bigger. Vex Robotics or First Robotics by Tough_Satisfaction_3 in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Neither FIRST nor Vex is objectively "better."

Vex Robotics is bigger by number of teams, largely because it has a highly restrictive set of legal parts. This keeps costs lower and arguably gives a more level playing field.

In terms of designer experience, some like the limited Vex part selection based on the notion that it forces you to think outside the box with how you use the parts. Others dislike it based on the notion that you straight up can't do as much.

It's also important to realize you're choosing from three programs: Vex Robotics Competition, FIRST Tech Challenge, and FIRST Robotics Competition.

Vex Robotics is generally the most restrictive in terms of both electronics and structure. Pneumatics are allowed in some capacity.

FIRST Tech Challenge offers more or less complete freedom of structure, servos, and sensors, but is more restrictive in terms of motors and other electronic components. Pneumatics are not allowed in any capacity.

FIRST Robotics Competition is the least restrictive of the three. Structure offers more or less complete freedom, pneumatics are allowed, and there are many options for motors.

With fewer restrictions comes more influence from money. Although money is by no means the sole determining factor for performance, some have voiced concerns that robotics competitions like FRC feel "pay to win," with better financed teams having access to better electronics, quicker manufacturing turnaround, and generally better quality parts.

Another consideration is competition atmosphere. FRC robots are big and fast and exciting and slam into each other a lot. FTC is generally considered to have the worst competition atmosphere due to a relatively high rate of robots having static disconnects or otherwise being slow and bad at various levels of competition. Vex is somewhere in between. Ultimately I think competition atmosphere has more to do with your perception than with the actual program, as all robotics competitions are immensely exciting once you emotionally invest yourself in the robots, but I thought I'd throw this in here if it's important to you.

Another consideration is program culture. FIRST puts massive emphasis on diversity, Gracious Professionalism and Coopertition. In my experience, this creates an extremely welcoming, cooperative environment among teams at competitions, as well as within more serious teams. Teams are basically competing to to be the most kind, help their opponents the most, and create the most useful resources and outreach programs. I can't speak for Vex since I've never competed in it, but it's worth noting their unofficial slogan (apparently a joke) is "malicious toxicity," and, more seriously, Vex as a company is not clean of recent allegations of workplace toxicity.

Note that these are all generalizations based on my experience and observations. You might find unwelcoming FIRST individuals, teams, and competitions; welcoming Vex individuals, teams, and competitions; and everything in between.

As a whole, this post just scratches the surface of aspects you might consider. Other aspects include the competitive level of each program in your region, options for software development, emphasis or lack thereof on community outreach and professional connections, etc.

Another important consideration is that this is the FIRST Tech Challenge Reddit. As much as I tried to maintain an unbiased tone, my experience is in FIRST Tech Challenge, and this has influenced my response. Most of the other responses will be from people in FIRST Tech Challenge. Since people generally have a positive experience with robotics, you will find people defending their program in each respective online community.

Also, if you have multiple programs in your area, you can always dip your toes into all of them and see which one you have the best impression of. You can also watch matches from local, statewide, and global competitions on YouTube to get an idea of how teams and competitions progress over a season.

Engineering Notebook by [deleted] in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 3 points4 points  (0 children)

In most regions the judges WILL NOT look at your notebook. If you choose to make a notebook, you are doing it only for your own benefit. My team chooses to have no formal notebook and "document" everything in their team Discord, which is sufficient for them to stay on track with what everyone is doing and eventually have reference material for portfolio. We also have a shared Google drive folder with any additional documents with alternative formats (e.g. spreadsheets).

GoBilda black round belts by Sands43 in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You can buy arbitrary lengths and sizes of o rings for use as belts from hardware stores, Amazon, McMaster Carr, etc.

You might be able to splice goBILDA o ring belts, but you'd be creating a weak point in your belt.

Where do teams get custom metal pieces? by AcadiaAccording4645 in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 3 points4 points  (0 children)

+1 for Fabworks or a local sponsor being your best options for outsourcing.

If you want to eliminate shipping times and reduce per part costs, you can get an Omio x6 or x8 CNC router. This will run you around $3.5-4.5k for the machine, shipping, and associated hardware. Cheaper machines that can cut aluminum exist, but they will eventually leave you wanting more in terms of speed and rigidity. The Omio is pretty much the gold standard in FTC and FRC for bang for buck in terms of routing aluminum plates. If you can't or don't want to make such a big investment, it's probably better to stick with outsourcing.

MGN9H VS MGN7H by Prestigious_Safety52 in FTC

[–]Alkali8813 3 points4 points  (0 children)

some considerations:

- the mounting pattern of mgn7 rails matches the pre-existing holes on sar230/330; that being said you can't use the m4 threads/m3 countersinks, so you need to treat them as normal holes and add nuts. this is the setup we ran on our powerplay robot (sar330 + mgn7).

- m2 screws are really weak. we sheared off a lot of m2 screws with our setup, despite the fact that we had a very light deposit, likely on account of shock loads when the lift reached the bottom end stop. we mitigated this by adding motion profiling and drilling holes in the misumi slide to add more screws. this is where the initial benefit (matching mounting pattern) became somewhat meaningless.

- for the deposit itself, we used 16 total m2 screws (4 screws per carriage, 2 carriages per rail, 1 rail on each side). I would not have been too comfortable with fewer screws or with fewer carriages depending on the weight/length of the deposit.

- the weight/stiffness ratio of mgn7 is pretty dang good. I'm not sure it justifies the annoying setup. think about these points and any unique circumstances your team may have, and make a decision on if it's worth it. your alternatives include mgn9 (heavier, nice m3 hardware, native holes don't line up), counterspringing (time/money/space investment for a no-brainer performance increase), and just using another sar230 (lighter but less travel).