Subject:
|
Re: Variations on the "ADDER SUBTRACTOR" ("differtrans" ?)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 28 Jan 1999 06:21:46 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
alex wetmore <alex@phred.&ihatespam&org>
|
Viewed:
|
1093 times
|
| |
|
|
On Thu, 28 Jan 1999, Cyberia wrote:
> I have mixed feelings about this device. I find it fascinating, for reasons
> I have yet to come to grips with. It has many weaknesses, the most
> significant being that only one motor provides propulsion, the other is only
> used for turning. When using tracks, if you don't gear the thing down
> ridiculously, there is not enough torque to drive the platform.
Which design did you use? If you try some of the more efficient designs
it works quite well. On my webpage (just updated,
http://www.phred.org/~alex/lego) I added pictures of my most recent
robot. It runs the large wheels at a 1:3 ratio from the motors. The
motors can run them directly, but the robot then runs too quickly to
keep up with.
My original designs (based on Leo's design) were much less efficient.
> It is lots of fun as a study in efficient re-configuration and optimization,
> but I don't find it terribly useful in practice unless wheels are employed.
> We have been trying to do this, but the problem that is eluding us now is a
> truly functional caster for the rear.
The caster design on the wanderer works very well. The caster is within
the turning radius, so the robot can turn on the corner of tables without
falling off (this is useful for building things like the "torbot").
The recent set of pictures should be enough for people to build a very
similar robot.
alex
--
Did you check the web site first?: http://www.crynwr.com/lego-robotics
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
16 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
