Yes, the Micromouse that is competitive today is a very specialized (and expensive) platform! I don't care to spend $120+ on each motor!
My thought was just to get the size down a little. The mazes aren't that big. I was first building a small 'bot for Table Top competitions (HBRobotics), but just as I got a chassis designed with a pair of LM motors with encoders (tail to tail) the club decided to build up a full size maze (just finished), and start up some "challenges". Well, my "Micro Moose" was too big for the maze. Back to the CAD package. Now the two motors sit side-by-side, and run through gears.
The Mark III I posted I envision as a low cost way to get a 'bot into the maze for newer robot builders, and kids.
The SES Servo rover was not introduced as a Micromouse, my only thought was that if it could also "run" in the Micromouse maze, it would have an even wider audience. Just a thought!
With two opposing servo shafts, such a bracket might also do duty in the arm department. Just thinking...
If I make up a bracket, I'll try to keep in mind some additional "servo horn" hole patterns for attachment. Nothing planned as yet.
Robot Dude wrote:
Yes I was referring to the SES servo bot. My point was it's already a pretty good little platform even without making a special bracket. But Hey, who knows maybe I should make a custom chassis for it. I will think about it.
As for the term micromouse. 12 or so years ago micromouse meant a really small rover. But nowadays it means an incredibly fast line or maze follower, that can map and find the fastest solution. So I'm purposely not calling the SES servo rover a micromouse.