16th March 2017, 20:23
Does the rotating crank in a Jansen linkage count as a "rolling mechanism" under FRA rules?
Last edited by Igor; 16th March 2017 at 20:32.
30th March 2017, 21:30
I would have assume not as they only have 1 degree of freedom. The rules stipulate 2 degrees of freedom i.e. 2 independent joints. The linkaqges in the Jansen linkage control it to a single degree. That said I'm sure you could get close to the line once, e.g. a very insignificant second joint for a dummy 'ankle', but thats not really in the spirit of it.
31st March 2017, 20:19
The plan is to mount the motors on drive 'pods' along with the legs rather than on the body of the bot. The pods can then be twisted (motors as well) like the front wheels of a car. This will allow the legs to yaw as well as pitch giving a second degree of freedom.
What worries me is the latest Robot Wars rules describes robots with rolling and sliding mechanisms as shufflers but have a shuffler allowance. SPARC rules prevent unrestricted rotary motors altogether.
Although the FRA rules are clear walkers have linear actuators and shufflers have cams, crank based drives aren't clear.
At first sight, my design appears to qualify as a walker under FRA rules (moveable legs, 2 DOF) but might fall foul of the rolling and sliding rule. I thought the rolling rule was there to prevent drillzilla style cam based drives qualifying as walkers but I'm beginning to wonder if it's broader than that and includes crank based drives as well.
Also, would twisting count as sliding?
I'm aiming for beetleweight as a proof of concept.
Last edited by Igor; 31st March 2017 at 20:25.
31st March 2017, 20:25
No point asking here. Email the robot wars team at firstname.lastname@example.org and ask
15th April 2017, 11:39
Thanks, I've sent them an email.
I might just build my bot anyway as I'm curious to see if it would work.