99999v's fall robot reveal for vex tipping point. Feel free to ask any questions. For a more detailed explanation of the robot, see this vexforum post: www.vexforum.c...
My team has been looking at this robot since we first starting building and we have been very interested in it. Currently we are working on a base and designing the intake/conveyor belt part of the robot. This is our 1st year as a team competing at Vex and were looking for pictures of the base or a general design of the intake. It would help us a lot, thank you!
if you want to could you answer a few questions? 1. How long did it take to make? 2. Specifically how long did it take to make the the pringle collecter? 3. This ones kinda not related but idk its in the comments
If we only had a drive train and 1.5 people working on the build do you think a new team ( we started in september) could make a mogo lifter and a pringle collector by oct 23rd? We have 75 minutes a school day to work on the robot and 4 hours max to work after school. We dont have the pringles yet and we have limited parts. Do you think we could have a Finished bot by then?
@@grantcatdone3417 1. robot took 2 months to design, 2 days to build, 1 week to refine, and 1 week to program. the ring system took maybe an hour to actually build, but we'd spent lots of time designing it in CAD beforehand so we knew the geometry would work out. if you only have a drive right now, and you need a robot by the 23rd, I would not recommend going for a ring system at this time. Go for a simple goal grabbing and lifting robot, you won't be able to get both that and a ring system done with enough time to tune it properly. Especially if you don't have rings to test, it requires a lot of fiddly adjusting. But you can plan on doing a ring system after your competition, once you have the time and resources. A goal grabbing and lifting robot can do very well, and I would prioritize that functionality above everything else. Good luck, if you need anything else always ask.
@@xenon27272 if the ring collecter only took 2 hours to build and you already had the kinks worked out would you mind sharing the CAD for it? As stated before we have limited parts and are new to vex so we couldn't really CAD a 100% design for anything because we didn't know if we had the parts or knew what they did. We plan on using CAD for the game manipulators now that we sort of know what we have and what they do. We would only be using the geometry that you created but not the entire design. Would you care to share the CAD or do you believe it would take too much of the valuable learning and testing process of building robots? It also feels like and probably is cheating. Again i am only asking because we have limited time but would love to do it ourselves. we could probably print out a few pringles if the game elements dont arrive on time. Also thanks for responding!
@@grantcatdone3417 I'll tell you now that my cad would not be at all useful for you. Every robot is different, so the geometry I used on my conveyor would not work for your robot. I really don't recommend attempting to rush a ring scoring mechanism with less than 2 weeks to work. That would almost certainly be biting off more than you can chew, and you'd end up with a robot that can't do anything well, opposed to a robot that can't do rings, but is good at lifting goals.
@@xenon27272 understood we'll do our best with the time we've got and thanks for the advice! We'll make a 480p reveal vid on the 23rd no matter how complete our build is in honor of you. Idk we'll play decpacito on it or something.
That robot is amazing! We wanted to use pneumatics this year but we are having troubles on programming it? How did you write your code or where did you find yours? Thank you!
you have to set the solenoids up in the devices menu as a 3 wire port, digital out device. The simply set the device to true or false to switch the states of the solenoid.
yes the conveyor system has been the most problematic. It just took us many iterations of fine tuning and testing to get it to work how we wanted, the things we found that helped the most were guides at the top to center and deflect the rings onto the post, and tuning that spacing between the conveyor and the post.
it should be tight enough to prevent it from skipping, but no tighter than it needs to be. As for jamming, it depends on where on the conveyor your rings on jamming, if it's in the intaking part, that's really hard to fix and I still haven't found a solution for that. At the top, it's all about getting the deposit to happen as quickly and cleanly as possible using guides to direct the rings onto the pole.
Would you be able to describe or upload a couple images on imgur of how your screwjoints for your gears work and how you manage to cram a omni-wheel + a HS 60t gear with minimal slop and perfect spacing into a 4-hole wide area? ive chosen to use 4" omnis with 84t HS gears backing them however when I try to reduce slop by mounting the gear to the omni via poking standoffs through the wheel I end up losing out on alot of space and/or the screws just rub against the screws on the back of my bearing flats.
it's actually pretty easy to get the spacing for 3.25" wheels and HS gears to fit in a 4 hole gap, since 3.25" wheels are significantly thinner in width than 4" wheels. It is possible to do with 4" wheels as well though, just a matter of playing with the spacing. get the wheel to go as close to one channel without rubbing as possible, and then do the same with the gear and the other channel. The screw joints are a bit interesting, I used 2.5" screws in order to span the distance between the drive channels. don't have any good images, but the way the screw joint works is: Screw head - bearing - outer c channel - keps nut - (spacers, wheels gears, whatever has to pivot on the joint) - inner c channel - bearing the screw is supported on both ends by a bearing in order to have it perfectly aligned with the hole and be very robust. it's much harder to do screw joints with 4" wheels though, since only 3.25" have hole in the spokes that make bolting to gears convenient. You have to find a pattern of standoffs that fit around the spokes in the 4" wheels, I've never had to do this because I always use 3.25" wheels, but I know it's possible. if you're willing to wait a day, I can get you some photos that show the screw joints in detail.
@@xenon27272 Thanks for the detailed reply, and yeah waiting a day is fine for me. However one thing tho, I found some 2.5" star shoulderbolts in my parts drawer today but do you support the screw on the other end by just a bearing flat or do you add a nylock right at the end? because the way im doing it is: screw head - outer c-channel - spacer (to cover the rest of the shoulder bolt part) - standoff - nylock - exposed shank - nylock - washer - gear - washer - keps - inner c-channel - nylock. (also what is the purpose of the bearing flats may I ask? surely the fact you have a screw going across your c-channels should keep the concentricity high and the holes aligned so the gear is spinning on an almost perfectly horizontal screw)
@@bruhmoment5757 there are bearings on both sides of the screw so that the screw has plenty of support on both ends. if there was only a bearing on one end, the other end might be able to wiggle or flex around slightly, altering the spacing between the gears which isn't ideal. It appears I have forgotten to take images of my robot for your today, but what I can do is show the screw joints in CAD. In a few hours I'll upload a video showing the breakdown of the screw joints and how the spacing on them is. that said, if you've got a way you do screw joints and you aren't experiencing any wobble or shifting or anything like that, then you're probably fine. there are many ways to do screw joints right.
Hello 👋! if you dont mind explaining, how does your clamp work? Like i see theres a starting position then it goes from open to close. Its weird to try and explain but my question is how does it go from its start to open, then instead of going back to starting position it closes? Im preparing a robot for my state comp and your clamp looks very intriguing
So for the starting position, the clamp goes backwards far enough that the pistons then retract again, essentially it over-retracts into this position. But once the pistons extend and open the clamp, it will always prefer to close when the pistons retract instead of going back into that over-retracted state. I don't recommend using this clamp unless you don't have clearance for pistons above or behind the goal, the reason we did it this way was because there was no room above the goal because rings needed to be scored, and there was no way behind the goal because the tilter was there.
@@xenon27272 ooh ok that makes sense, i probably just end up putting my piston behind the actual clamp again, is there any other designs that you have seen that work well? Theres not many good teams in Oklahoma and I'm like 1 of 2 teams who actually have pneumatics to use so i don't see much
@@hazel_2186 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-0eMg8_Phe5Q.html here's a good one, not sure how the piston is mounted but you could either put it above or behind and get it to work well.
