Subject:
|
Re: vision command idea...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Sun, 17 Dec 2000 12:26:47 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1231 times
|
| |
|
|
Jennifer Clark <jen@vulture.dmem.strath.ac.uk> writes:
> The reason I usually end up tinkering with suspension is the need
> for powered models, assuming they use differentials, to have the
> wheels in contact with the ground at all times. For this reason I
> often don't care if the suspension mechanism resembles the real one
> or not, only that it does what is required. I'm even thinking about
> unsprung mechanisms now.
Many kinds of construction equpiment actually use unsprung
suspensions, so I think this is a sane approach. A telescopic
handler, for example, needs to be able to lift many different kinds of
weights, hence it cannot have the kind of suspension you would
normally find in a truck or a car.
If you are building a vehicle with two axles, it makes sense to have
one of them tiltable. That way all four wheels will touch the ground
at once. The new 4WD LEGO car does this:
http://guide.lugnet.com/set/8279
Fredrik
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: vision command idea...
|
| (...) Indeed - I've seen a good variation of this with a 4 axled vehicle which had two bogies with two axles each. Each pair of wheels on the side of each bogie had longitudinal pendulum type unsprung suspension, and the front bogie had an (...) (24 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: vision command idea...
|
| (...) Yes, I agree here. I suspect much of it has to do with the weight and balance of a Technic model, which is going to be vastly different, even in scale terms, from a real vehicle. Saying that, the suspension on the 8448 seems pretty realistic, (...) (24 years ago, 15-Dec-00, to lugnet.robotics)
|
22 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
