Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Posts: 486
Location: Melbourne
OK here is a CAD of the proposed robot, I know it looks similar to the retired tnp design however,
The frame is made of box section mild steel 20mm*20mm 2mm wall thickness.
The motors are welded to the frame not bolted in like the existing design,and will be easier to service.
The weapon motor is now internal
The weapon is a spinning disk KE weapon made from either stainless steel or Bisaloy.
Choppingboard armour is being used all around the side walls and polypropoline will be sandwedged between the choppingboard and frame to allow the bot to take some hits.
Weight may very well be an issue with the predicted frame weight of 6.2Kg's I'm still working on that.
Joined: 18 Jun 2004
Posts: 3842
Location: Queensland near Brisbane
When is a door? _________________ So even the rain that falls isn't actually going to fill our dams and our river systems
Wed Apr 19, 2006 5:26 pm
NMO Experienced Roboteer
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Posts: 486
Location: Melbourne
So I've been playing in cad quiet a bit and have come to a problem.
Do I make a frame out of 20*20*2 mm steel and cover in 6mm chopping board
OR
Do I (similar to kang, Marauder, raiden) build a bot in which the armour is the frame and make it out of 10mm ali.
Both have advantages and disadvantages. What does everyone think???
Thu May 04, 2006 11:51 am
Rotwang Experienced Roboteer
Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 1589
Location: Vic
I prefer an inner frame to carry the drives, batterys, electronics etc, some air armour and then the outer shell for protection and in some cases to absorb some of the weapon recoil.
That way a big hit can distort the outer shell without effecting anything vital.
Thu May 04, 2006 12:32 pm
Valen Experienced Roboteer
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 4436
Location: Sydney
monocouque (or whatever) is lighter for the same strength,
Downside is when somebody hits your armor it can stop your bot from working.
Shell and frame is heavier but armor can break without damaging frame.
It comes down to how much weight you have to play with and how much you wish to devote to "taking hits"
If your weapon isnt "oh my god" i'd probly suggest frame+ armor and better ability to take a pounding.
If on the other hand your weapon is how you win fights, then go monocoque (perhaps with little bits in vunerablle places) _________________ Mechanical engineers build weapons, civil engineers build targets
Thu May 04, 2006 12:41 pm
NMO Experienced Roboteer
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Posts: 486
Location: Melbourne
there really good points so I'm thinking of 10mm aluminium armour with everything mounted on a frame underneith with some foam cusioning the armour. I've weighed it all out in cad and it should weigh around 11.9 Kg's without the weapon disk
Thu May 04, 2006 2:57 pm
NMO Experienced Roboteer
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Posts: 486
Location: Melbourne
the squishy foam goes between the steel (grey) and the aluminium white
Thu May 04, 2006 3:36 pm
Nick Experienced Roboteer
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Posts: 11802
Location: Sydney, NSW
From experience, you will have a hard time getting into the weight limit with both a steel frame (even a small one) and 10mm armour - the little bits & pieces just keep adding up. I would look at replacing some of the less critical armour with 5mm or using the 10mm to support the weapon and use less steel, like Kang. Unless the baseplate in that CAD model is really thin, you could reduce the steel to just the weapon support arm. _________________ Australian 2015 Featherweight champion
UK 2016 Gladiator champion
Thu May 04, 2006 4:04 pm
Valen Experienced Roboteer
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 4436
Location: Sydney
try to stay away from squares
they are a weak shape
Build stuff out of triangles if possible _________________ Mechanical engineers build weapons, civil engineers build targets
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum