Logan's Chassis.

[Sunny]

So, I found this on Chief Delphi.

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/34527?

It looks kinda like what Logan's trying to throw together.

One thing that I don't like about Logan's chassis is the 18" wheel base. I mean, that's ridiculous.

One way we can fix that, and I think this is where we're going wrong, is to not make the angle bar go up to the entire 12.5". The angle piece is only there to help the wheel angle itself, and it doesn't need to go up that high. What this means, is that you should have A LOT more room to play around with your wheel base.

[Tanner]

Doing some CADDing of Logan's Chassis. I've got one side done, but Dad and I are trying to figure out how to get a accurate mass of it all. Right now it is solid Al and it (one side) weights ~21lbs. Exciting.

-Tanner

[Sunny]

What exactly is the wheel base? Meaning from where one point is touching the ground to the other?

If that's not decent, then try and making the angle piece bar smaller.

[Tanner]

What exactly is the wheel base? Meaning from where one point is touching the ground to the other?

If that's not decent, then try and making the angle piece bar smaller.

It's exactly 18in (go figure).

I want to see if I have to make it out of the 8020 parts to get a accurate weight, otherwise we're going to have a 50lb chassis without batteries.

-Tanner

[Sunny]

It's exactly 18in (go figure).

Make the angled bars shorter and make the base larger.

I want to see if I have to make it out of the 8020 parts to get a accurate weight, otherwise we're going to have a 50lb chassis without batteries.

Well, if you just take your perimeter in feet and then divide by 2, you'll have how much the robot should weigh in terms of 80-20.

[Tanner]

Make the angled bars shorter and make the base larger.

I can do that.

Well, if you just take your perimeter in feet and then divide by 2, you'll have how much the robot should weigh in terms of 80-20.

Huh?

-Tanner

[Sunny]

Huh?

-Tanner

If you take the amount of the 80-20 you're using in feet, like let's say you're using 20 feet of 80-20, then divide that by two, and that's effectively the weight of the 80-20 metal you're using 10 pounds.

80-20 metal weight is 1/2 pound per foot. So that's a good thing to base your weight calcs. off of.

[Tanner]

If you take the amount of the 80-20 you're using in feet, like let's say you're using 20 feet of 80-20, then divide that by two, and that's effectively the weight of the 80-20 metal you're using 10 pounds.

80-20 metal weight is 1/2 pound per foot. So that's a good thing to base your weight calcs. off of.

That'd be nice if I was doing a nice and easy 2D drawing. It doesn't quite work with 3D when Inventor gives you Volume.

You could probably set up a proportion to convert my Volume to however much a 1x1x12 piece of 8020 weighs, but I'm lazy. Tired more like it.

-Tanner

[Logan]

If that's not decent, then try and making the angle piece bar smaller.

This changes the angles that the wheels will climb the ramp.

While you think that this 18 inch wheel base is "ridiculous", keep in mind that most teams using the wide orientation used a similar wheelbase.

[Sunny]

This changes the angles that the wheels will climb the ramp.

Not exactly. If you cut the bar size in half, then mount it vertical the rest of the way, then you still have the 45 degree angle but without the small wheel base.

While you think that this 18 inch wheel base is "ridiculous", keep in mind that most teams using the wide orientation used a similar wheelbase.

I don't think the small wheel base is justified in the fact that other teams did it as well. In wide 6 wheel drive, granted that the wheel base at any one given moment is roughly 12", but the robot is not solely depending on the 12". It can oscillate back onto the back part of the 6 WD and then continue rolling on. If we tip backward onto the back wheels while driving, I'm pretty sure we're going to end up tipping with the back wheels spinning as we attempt to correct ourselves.