Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
Upgrade Wheels — Parallax Forums

Upgrade Wheels

ajwardajward Posts: 1,130
edited 2011-03-03 19:26 in Robotics
Hi All...

Just assembled my Boe Bot last night and it's pretty cool. I was just wondering if there are any wheels available that don't need those rubber bands?

Also, one of my reasons for building the "critter" is to haul around a small (~175 gm) wireless, color video cam. Would this be an acceptable load for the Bot?

Thanks for any advice!

Amanda
«1

Comments

  • ercoerco Posts: 20,256
    edited 2010-12-16 09:45
    The rubber bands are there for traction; is it just the look that you object to? Form follows function here. I don't know of a direct substitute wheel. Scribbler uses narrow O-rings instead of rubber bands, but those wheels fit a square shaft, I believe the BoeBot wheels go right onto the servo spline, so they wouldn't fit anyway. Unless you want to fabricate some wheels of your own or modify some, the stock wheels are probably your best option.

    Your 175 gram camera should not overload the BoeBot; a D cell weighs ~150 g. I wouldn't go much heavier. Keep it as light as possible for maximum battery life.
  • WhitWhit Posts: 4,191
    edited 2010-12-16 09:50
    See - http://www.pololu.com/catalog/category/46 Remember to check sizes!Parallax Servos are the same as Futaba. I'm a bit like erco. You may want to play with the standard wheels first. The work very well.
  • ajwardajward Posts: 1,130
    edited 2010-12-16 10:36
    Heya...

    Yeah... it is kinda the look. Thinking a bout chucking them into my drill and carve out a v-groove for a silicone o-ring.
    Also thinking of going to tank treads... I like that look. (Johnnie-5 dontcha know!) :->

    Still =playing= with it and testing on my kitchen floor so traction isn't a big issue so far.

    Looks like the Pololu wheels would work. Same diameter and the spline is "supposed" to be the same.

    Thanks for y'alls feedback! :-)

    Amanda
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,256
    edited 2010-12-16 14:12
    Good info, Whit! There are at least 2 different spine types, with a one-tooth incompatability difference, so I'm leery of making recommendations. It does look like the Parallax servos are Futaba-compatible (probably just plain Futaba), so those Pololu/Solarbotics wheels should fit onto the servo spline. There is also a tire upgrade http://www.pololu.com/catalog/product/694 that works on those wheels, not sure if it would fit the stock Parallax wheel.

    Amanda: There's a digital encoder kit add-on for BoeBot that is useful. It is designed to use the stock wheels, so if you change those you might not be able to use that kit, FYI. http://www.parallax.com/Store/Robots/RoboticAccessories/tabid/145/ProductID/80/List/0/Default.aspx?SortField=ProductName,ProductName

    And there's also a walker kit if you want to go really nuts... http://www.parallax.com/Store/Robots/RoboticAccessories/tabid/145/ProductID/314/List/0/Default.aspx?SortField=ProductName,ProductName
  • ajwardajward Posts: 1,130
    edited 2010-12-16 17:55
    Hey Erco...

    Interesting. From what I've found, the Pololu wheels have an encoder pattern moulded in. Is this not compatible? (Not really sure what I would use the encoder thingy for, but I'm always wanting to learn!!!)

    Amanda
  • WhitWhit Posts: 4,191
    edited 2010-12-16 20:44
    Amanda,

    I am sure you brought a tear to erco's eye when you asked about the encoder thingy. erco is kinda the encoder king. I will let him tell you why you will have to have encoders someday!
  • ajwardajward Posts: 1,130
    edited 2010-12-17 22:50
    Whit wrote: »
    Amanda,

    I am sure you brought a tear to erco's eye when you asked about the encoder thingy. erco is kinda the encoder king. I will let him tell you why you will have to have encoders someday!

    Lol... I have a rough idea of how encoders might be used, but I'm always open to new concepts. Something like that is a bit down the road tho'. Bob is still getting used to my rusty programming with the occasional headlong rush into a door frame or driving off the desk when I forget to turn the servos off! ;-)

    Amanda
  • ZootZoot Posts: 2,227
    edited 2010-12-18 00:24
    I use these wheels on servo projects (there are also GMXX gearmotor compatible versions of these wheels). They look sharp, the wheels are molded on, and there are encoder stripes on the inside that can be painted:

    http://solarbotics.com/products/sw/

    These are Futaba compatible splines.
  • Martin_HMartin_H Posts: 4,051
    edited 2010-12-18 05:45
    Amanda, the Solarbotics wheels with the built in encoder disks are compatible with wheel watcher quadrature encoders. They're quite nice, although the basic stamp can only use one of their two output channels. But those encoders are compatible with a number of co-processors which would add a great deal of features to your Boe Bot.
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,256
    edited 2010-12-22 10:49
    Another Futaba servo-fittin' color changin' alternate wheel source is Junun, a tad cheaper at $6/pair: http://www.junun.org/MarkIII/Info.jsp?item=11

    Interesting site worth bookmarking and poking around; they have some offbeat parts the best prices around on many sensors: http://www.junun.org/MarkIII/Store.jsp
  • zappmanzappman Posts: 418
    edited 2010-12-22 13:39
    ajward wrote: »
    Hi All...

    Just assembled my Boe Bot last night and it's pretty cool. I was just wondering if there are any wheels available that don't need those rubber bands?

    Also, one of my reasons for building the "critter" is to haul around a small (~175 gm) wireless, color video cam. Would this be an acceptable load for the Bot?

    Thanks for any advice!

    Amanda


    You might want to take a look at the wheels from Budget Robotics, http://www.budgetrobotics.com/category/Wheels-and-Casters-67. They don't use rubber bands and have Futaba-compatible splines.
  • Martin_HMartin_H Posts: 4,051
    edited 2010-12-22 16:21
    That ArdBot chassis kit looks like a pretty good deal!
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,256
    edited 2010-12-22 19:07
    So is a 2' x 2' piece of 5/16" plywood, and a lot stronger and more open ended!!! :)
  • Martin_HMartin_H Posts: 4,051
    edited 2010-12-22 19:25
    True, but that takes things up a notch in terms of batteries, motor drive electronics, and motors.
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,256
    edited 2010-12-24 15:10
    There is some nice ~5/32 plywood in hobby shops that makes a nice strong, stiff 8-10" robot platform. This Ardbot's "expanded PVC" (foam) chassis may be cheap, but it can't be half as durable or rigid as plywood or solid plastic (1/4" styrene sheet is also very strong). Using that same foam material for wheels makes even less sense. If you're going to invest the time & energy to build a robot, start with a chassis/wheel material that won't give out before your enthusiasm does! :)
  • Martin_HMartin_H Posts: 4,051
    edited 2010-12-25 15:58
    Erco, don't look at my CBA robot, it's an act of pure "expanded PVC" (foam) heresy.
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,256
    edited 2010-12-25 19:38
    Aaarrgggghhhhh! :)
  • GordonMcCombGordonMcComb Posts: 3,366
    edited 2011-02-24 16:11
    Pardon the long post...

    As the author of the ArdBot series in SERVO Magazine, and chief bottle washer of Budget Robotics, makers of numerous robot bases and components that use expanded PVC, I wanted to address some of the common misunderstandings regarding PVCX.

    Let’s start first by mentioning there is no single “ideal” construction material for building robots. If there were, we’d all be using it.

    With that out of the way, despite its common “foam” moniker, there is nothing foamy or spongy about expanded PVC. In fact its compression strength rivals wood and many plastics commonly used to build bots.

    PVCX is a solid, rigid plastic (little or no phthalate plasticizers added), engineered to have less density than the same bulk of unexpanded PVC sheet. The manufacturing process involves extruding the molten PVC through a shaped orifice while injecting nitrogen or other non-flammable gas into the plastic. The gas expands the plastic - hence “expanded” PVC.

    The cross-section of PVCX has a cell-like structure that some people say looks like foam. But it is not at all like “foamed polystyrene” (blue/pink foam) which is used as insulation or sub floor material. PVCX is hard and solid and (contrary to what you may read elsewhere) is not porous.

    PVCX exhibits far superior elongation at break than most any other readily-available plastic: some 20-40%, as opposed to less than 5% for polystyrene. This is among the chief reasons I prefer using it. This make it better for any application that’s subjected to repetitive stress. (PVCX has about 1.5X the fatigue strength as polystyrene, and maybe 2X or so that of acrylic.)

    Over the years I’ve built numerous robots using all kinds of wood, various metals, and several dozen types of plastics. And over those years - and given the right job - I’ve learned to favor PVCX for its low-cost, but also its ease of workability, especially for younger learners where hand tools are more appropriate for cutting and drilling.

    For desktop robots - those under 5 or 10 pounds - it’s especially important to match the construction material to the job. I favor PVCX for smaller bots because it adds less weight than that of most other materials. Added weight consumes battery life, so it’s never a bad idea to put your bots on a diet.

    Regarding the comment about the use of PVCX for small wheels: I think there must be some confusion as to the compressive strength of PVCX versus other plastics. Its compressive strength puts it on par with an equal mass of plastics used to produce similar wheels (typically polystyrene and ABS), using either injection molding or fused deposition. Regardless, the limiting factor for all such wheels is the radial loading on the motor shaft, and all these wheels perform well.

    Downsides to PVCX: It has poor impact resistance, though depending on its cross section no worse than polystyrene. Its melting point is quite low, and it releases corrosive gas when cut with a laser cutter. The difficulty in cutting it is why most people don’t offer PVCX for robot bases. It's a PITA to machine. We use a CNC router, which is more labor intensive and very, very messy.
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,256
    edited 2011-02-24 16:52
    Gordon: Thanks for your very objective and well-written reply. It's almost as though you have professional writing experience! :) Excellent points all, especially about younger learners and ease of hand fabrication.

    BTW, I love all your robot books. Your insight & experience in building bots is legendary. If you say PVCX is good for robots, this court will not dispute it! :)
  • Martin_HMartin_H Posts: 4,051
    edited 2011-02-24 17:08
    If anyone is curious what machining PVCX looks like, here's a video posted by Mike Davey:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VHr7Fi6tCg&feature=related

    He made that video back when he was selling the CBA robot kit. Like Gordon's ArdBot, it used expanded PVC for the wheels and chassis. So I imagine making the ArdBot looks similar (and makes a similar mess).

    I liked Gordon's books as well. At some point I plan to build PropBot from my propeller platform kit and Gordon might be getting an order from me.
  • GordonMcCombGordonMcComb Posts: 3,366
    edited 2011-02-24 19:36
    Erco, In consideration for all the help you've provided to robot builders everywhere, I'd be happy to send you an ArdBot chassis to experiment with (see my email addy on the BR site). PVC isn't for everything (forget combat robots!) but I'd be interested in your comments.

    For those who prefer to use their material of choice, in a few weeks I'll be posting CAD (DXF) files of the ArdBot pattern files, plus to-size drilling and cutting templates (in PDF form).

    FWIW Dept: Though called the ArdBot, it's really microcontroller-agnostic. SERVO was interested in the Arduino angle first - they have a regular column in N&V on the Propeller but nothing on the Arduino at the moment. One of the reasons I dropped by was to get more immersed in the Propeller. Anyone here know anything about that controller?...:lol:
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,256
    edited 2011-03-02 22:04
    Gordon et al: I WAS WRONG! I made an earlier post fairly dissing Budget Robotics' foam PVCX chassis. I have seen many bad foams in my 20+ years in the toy biz, and I assumed this chassis was more of the same. Gordon (of Budget Robotics) was kind enough to send me some sample chassis and I have changed my tune. Per his earlier posts, it is a sturdy material and definitely plenty strong for small robots. Probably best to NOT even call it foam, that's what suckered me down the wrong road. The wheels are also quite nice, I wouldn't hesitate to use these parts and this material for robots and other projects. Thanks to Gordon for setting me straight, and especially doing so in a professional and friendly manner.

    So by all means, have a peek at http://www.budgetrobotics.com . Mention my name for a 20% price INCREASE! :)
  • W9GFOW9GFO Posts: 4,010
    edited 2011-03-02 22:33
    I used PVCX to make this little robot arm. I found it to be easy to work with, cheap and glues together very well with hot glue.

    Rich H
    300 x 330 - 11K
  • Martin_HMartin_H Posts: 4,051
    edited 2011-03-03 04:47
    @Erco, hypothetically speaking assume you have a Propeller Platform board, and a wulfden robot control shield.

    Which do you think would be a more fun project. A tankbot of some sort, or the ArdBot chassis? Also assume the need to determine position which implies encoders of some sort. Additional IR would be used in either case to avoid running off edges or ramming walls.

    The ArdBot would be a snap to add on quadrature encoders like Wheel Watchers. The downside is that it's similar to other servo driven differential drive robots, but with a propeller chip.

    A tankbot would likely be a difficult fit for wheel encoders. But I have the crazy idea of using the mouse sensor a smidge above the floor to track position. So the upside would be going off in a different direction.

    I would also likely want to be able to add on a three axis manipulator of some sort to either bot.


    @W9GFO, that's a really nice looking robot arm. How did you attach the both sides of the joint to the servo?
  • W9GFOW9GFO Posts: 4,010
    edited 2011-03-03 06:57
    Martin_H wrote: »
    @W9GFO, that's a really nice looking robot arm. How did you attach the both sides of the joint to the servo?

    Thanks, the servos are glued in place and each joint opposite the servo output has a disk type hinge made out of the same material as the rest of the arm.

    Rich H
    648 x 810 - 57K
  • Martin_HMartin_H Posts: 4,051
    edited 2011-03-03 08:56
    W9GFO, that's clever design. I imagine the concentricity of the disk and hole with the servo axis on the other side is a bit tricky. But in exchange there's no side to side shimmy of the arm as it moves. Plus it is really light.

    I know the side to side shimmy well because it's an issue with all the Lego arms I've built. Add enough structure to make them stiff and they're too heavy.
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,256
    edited 2011-03-03 09:27
    @Martin_H: I must admit that I'm not a huge tread fan for robots. They look nifty, but from my limited experience, they just don't deliver the agility, accuracy & efficiency of nice wheels. Yes, I realize that I'm setting myself up for a double-schooling in this same thread when Gordon or some tread whiz corrects me, but that's how I roll...!

    Treads absorb a lot of power even driving straight. Turning is even worse; somethings always dragging, and the center of rotation changes a lot based on the surface you're turning on, so odometry is much less accurate. Indoors on a smooth floor, wheels seem to have every advantage in power, maneuverability & repeatability and lend themselves to encoders and accurate odometry (and all that wonderful trigonometry you've been doing recently!). Outdoors on really rough terrain, treads are definitely best for getting brute force power to the ground. But getting even a small rock caught between the tread and bogie can lock up a tread system. If I ever built an all-terrain outdoor bot, my first choice would be 4 or 6 fat rubber tires, all wheel drive.

    Fun fact from http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/09/us-military-combat-vehicles-fuel-efficiency-economy-gas-mileage.php?page=2 :

    Fuel Economy of the M1 Abrams Battle Tank: It is powered by a 1,500 hp turbine and gets about 0.6 miles per gallon. It will burn 12 gallons per hour when idle.
  • John AbshierJohn Abshier Posts: 1,116
    edited 2011-03-03 11:53
    I remember a rock getting between tread and bogie. It shot out like squeezing a watermelon seed between thumb and finger. Hit a soldier in the head and dropped him where he stood. Injury was a cut and a concussion.

    John Abshier
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2011-03-03 12:03
    I agree with erco: the harder and skinnier the wheel, the better for odometry. But you still need enough traction to avoid slippage. O-ring tires are probably the best compromise between traction and odometry precision on a smooth surface.

    -Phil
  • GordonMcCombGordonMcComb Posts: 3,366
    edited 2011-03-03 14:16
    erco wrote: »
    @Martin_H: I must admit that I'm not a huge tread fan for robots. They look nifty, but from my limited experience, they just don't deliver the agility, accuracy & efficiency of nice wheels. Yes, I realize that I'm setting myself up for a double-schooling in this same thread when Gordon or some tread whiz corrects me, but that's how I roll...!

    With you on this one. For outdoor or uneven terrain I prefer 4+WD, through for the most part tracked robots are cheaper to build. Maybe that's why they so popular.

    For 4/6WD it can be difficult finding suitable wheels, though if you want to allow it to run indoors and out, and assuming you don't want to pay a fortune.

    Years back I lucked onto a shipment of some inexpensive hard rubber wheels imported from China (for some toy long lost), They had nubs on the the tire treads, which effectively reduced the contact area when over a hard surface, and acted as cleats for softer terrain. So, a vehicle like this one:

    http://www.budgetrobotics.com/shop/?itemid=233

    could steer over Formica, carpet, linoleum, hardwood floor, dirt, grass, and sand equally well -- that is, no chatter when over a hard surface, and good traction over a soft surface. Alas, the supply of those wheels dried up. (I went to *every* Dollar Tree in Southern California to buy up their stock of the toy that used this wheel!)
Sign In or Register to comment.