If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. Please email info@fightingrobots.co.uk if you have any questions.
Just been thinking about how to get proper speed control of the disc. Had a look at the wiring diagrams for the NCC speedos and was thinking the simplest soultion to get whatever speed you want is to use a simple relay starter on the ignition switch with the speed pot used in fixed position. Obviously a bit of superglue to fix the potentiometer would save an awful lot of potential errors/mistakes. Just seemed a really simple really easy way of doing it and means that the drive doesn't suffer because of a reduced overall voltage to suit the disc.
Quite sure this facility is available on most other speedos too.
Wouldn't by far the simplest way, especially given that it doesn't take running a speed controller specially for the disc, be to just choose your reduction ratio (pulley diameters, sprocket teeth or whatever you're using) to get the right speed?
That's also easily verifiable when checking the machine over.
Quite sure it would be I was just pointing out that if it's already built like Dragonstrike and SMIDSY that it doesn't take a lot of modifications to get it going slower.
From a personal point of view I'd rather tweak the wiring than anything else.
problem there is if somthing goes wrong with the speed controller and the fets short out then the motor will get full power. So it should be in the rules that you have to limit the speed by gearing correctly or using less batterys.
Speed controller used for powering the disc... ( reduce the risk of contactors welding shut )
Specific motor(s) only allowed.
Specific gear ratio specified ( limiting the rpm )
Specific maximum disc diameter
Specific maximum mass
Of course its not going to be, do the maths and come up with a magic figure, its going to be subjective, we just need to work together and see how it goes.
I think ill propose to run a spinner in a very downgraded setup to see results, maybe even outside of an event in the summer. We can then come up with the magic figure.
Like i said, i have been very impressed with the input, and we already have some volunteers, plus 4 teams wanting to build something, so after RIAT we can get on with it.
Its great to think of new ideas and trying to get spinners back however call the competition what you like a spinner is a spinner and it doesnt go well with net roofs.
I would concur on that point made by James. After doing archery for many years I know that a sharp arrow weighing 100g tops will quite happily pierce and go through a heavy archery net at the back and the arrows weren't travelling anywhere near as fast as some parts that fly off bots.
A composite type arrangement might work though, a thin plastic such as HDPE or polycarb (2mm) to take the main bite from the projectile and then a net over the top to take the flex, catch the piece and hold it in place.
It is a tricky one but you will never go wrong being too safe and careful
I also concur - having been hit by a bolthead that went clean thru a substantial net roof and hitting me standing some 20m away from an arena leaving a mark on my leg thru my jeans I am certainly unhappy with anything less than a grade 2 arena.
Theres ways round things, this isn't about full combat its about entertainment. Ive been pleased that people have realised it.
If a solid one piece disc is fighting against a robot with sacrificial armour it can in my opinion be done safely.
You were hit by a bolt.... that means the robot had enough power to break it... so we put in the rules thicker bolts for pannels, or remove them altogether, theres always ways round problems, we are engineers, we find sollutions.
Yes I agree a class 2 arena is needed for full combat, but I think theres room for movement. We ran fw spinners for years until they got too powerful, Im proposing instead of building an arena to suit the robots, ( never going to happen ) we build robots to suit the arena.
The FRA shut the door on all spinners, what im proposing, is to experiment with them and find a safe level.
Even if we had a spinner running at such a slow speed it stopped everytime it hit something, put it against a robot with pannels designed to fall off..... then we have a new form of entertainment which I have recognised is lacking from RR events which can be put back in in a safe way.
Im proposing we build a set of stage props, not full combat robots, and its something I will be experimenting with through the summer with some of the teams who have volunteered to get involved with.
Spinner v spinnner would be a no no... thats not what we want.
Spinner v an axe.... or spinner v a low pressure flipper.... and you have entertainment.
It might work, it might not, but unless we try, we never know... thinking out side of the box once again.
again jonno a spinner is a spinner weather you call it for full combat or entertainment doesnt make a difference, yes lower the power, make weak armour and stage it but that means parts will fly off easier. Ive not seen a single featherweight spinner ever that has been safe in a net roof. Its been proved lots of times even in the early years. FRA only did something about it when a big piece came out which the audience saw.
I think Jonno will come up with a proven solution to this.
To start with the premise it can't be done means you don't develop things further, if we have a maximum peripheral speed of the weapon and an idea of the mass being thrown,
Jonno can do experiments to prove the system works; the FRA will oversee the results and make a decision on it based on proven repeatable tests,
I€™m not saying it can be done, what I am saying is lets try.
Comment