Mecanum Wheel Fit Checker and Decision Report (100mm baseline + 3606/2/3/4 inch aliases)
Run an immediate fit check for mecanum wheel and 3606 series mecanum wheel set, 2 mecanum wheels, 3 inch mecanum wheels, 4 inch mecanum wheels, and mecanum wheels 4 inch use cases, then review methodology, evidence, and risk boundaries on the same canonical route at/products/mecanum-wheels.
37 public sources checked through 2026-05-05
Published 2026-04-25; last updated 2026-05-05 (stage1b deep-evidence refresh for 4-inch and standards lifecycle)
3 operational scenarios from baseline to rough duty
Single canonical URL for alias and canonical intent
Default profile preview: Borderline, verification required (103%)
Empty state: run the checker to get a result for your exact mecanum wheel profile for 3606 series set, 100mm, 2 inch, 3 inch, 4 inch, or 2 mecanum wheels queries.
Baseline preview below uses the default profile until you run calculation with your own inputs.
This preview is from default inputs. Click Calculate 100mm wheels fit to generate your own result and decision CTA.
Benchmark usage
103%
Roller contact stress index
1.45
Traction stability score
66
Stage1b Audit: Gap Closure
Audit updated May 5, 2026| Gap found | Decision impact | Stage1b update | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Route-grade risk was mentioned in prose but not modeled as an explicit input/output variable in the tool. | Users could miss slope-driven instability and over-trust fit output for inclined routes. | Added route grade (%) field, grade amplification factor, and explicit >10% boundary warning aligned to 1910.178(n) travel clauses. | Closed |
| Cross-vendor load claims mixed kg/set and lb/wheel units without one normalized basis. | Procurement comparisons could be distorted by unit mismatch and wrong per-wheel/per-set interpretation. | Added NIST-based unit normalization path and explicit converted examples for AndyMark/Nexus references. | Closed |
| US safety-standard boundary for driverless AGV deployments was under-specified. | Teams could misclassify pre-screen results as sufficient without mapping to applicable system-level standard track. | Added ANSI/ITSDF B56.5-2024 scope/effective-date anchor and linked it to checker-to-compliance handoff guidance. | Closed |
| Impact and durability boundaries lacked public failure examples. | Cost risk could be understated when routes include repeated seam impacts and shock loads. | Added AndyMark durability white-paper datapoints (70lb performance degradation and 12-inch concrete-drop spindle failure). | Closed |
| Kinematic assumptions were not explicitly tied to a peer-reviewed framework. | Cross-functional reviewers could not quickly verify why the checker includes directionality and lateral-load factors. | Added CMU 1987 kinematic-modeling source to clarify model lineage and non-durability scope. | Closed |
| No open public standard publishes the exact 85/110 benchmark bands and 3.6/5.2 stress-index cutoffs. | Potential overconfidence if heuristics are interpreted as compliance or universal engineering limits. | Kept explicit pending-confirmation status and require supplier fatigue test plus pilot wear trend before final release. | Pending confirmation |
| "4 inch mecanum wheels" alias intent was not mapped to a dedicated canonical boundary section. | Users could assume 4-inch intent needs a separate route or could miss 100mm-vs-101.6mm boundary handling in RFQ wording. | Added a dedicated 4-inch alias section with exact conversion mapping (101.6mm), baseline-delta interpretation, and one-URL CTA path on /products/mecanum-wheels. | Closed |
| 2-inch alias conversion (50.8 mm) was shown but lacked a metrology-grade primary citation in the mecanum source table. | Teams could challenge alias mapping integrity and fork procurement threads around diameter wording. | Added NIST Appendix B.8 as exact conversion evidence and linked it to the 2 mecanum wheels alias boundary section. | Closed |
| "3 inch mecanum wheels" alias intent was not explicitly mapped to one canonical boundary section. | Users could misread 3-inch intent as requiring a separate route or directly reuse 100mm assumptions without diameter boundary checks. | Added 76.2mm alias conversion evidence, a dedicated 3-inch canonical boundary section, and explicit supplier-load evidence gates on the same URL. | Closed |
| "3606 series mecanum wheel set" legacy alias intent was not explicitly mapped to a canonical boundary section. | Legacy SKU searchers could assume a dedicated route or over-trust old catalog naming as a current, fully-equivalent release class. | Added a dedicated 3606 alias section with known/unknown evidence table, discontinuation boundary, and one-URL action path to canonical checker outputs. | Closed |
| 3-inch public-source interpretation was stale: roller count and load-evidence status were inaccurate. | Teams could under-estimate available 3-inch load evidence and mis-rank light-duty listings against 100mm baseline assumptions. | Re-audited AndyMark 3-inch source: corrected to 8 rollers and 40 lb/set disclosure, then added NIST-normalized kg conversion plus light-duty/torque boundary notes. | Closed |
| "2 mecanum wheels" query ambiguity (count/diameter wording and drive wheel vs intake wheel role) was not explicit in decision guidance. | Users could compare non-drive intake SKUs directly against AGV drive-wheel candidates and mis-rank options. | Added AndyMark 2.25 in intake-wheel counterexample plus disambiguation guidance to confirm quantity meaning, diameter intent, and duty role before RFQ. | Closed |
| Small-diameter public listings without load ratings were not highlighted as a blocking evidence gap. | No-load-rating products could enter direct capacity ranking and inflate release confidence. | Added REV 75mm and DFRobot 48mm evidence gap notes and forced pending-confirmation handling before PO decisions. | Closed |
| Industrial load transfer assumptions for 2-inch intent were not tied to application-specific integration guidance. | Buyers could treat one generic value as universal across floor, cycle, and system architecture changes. | Added TENTE industrial guidance showing load-capacity dependence on diameter and application context, with explicit prototyping gate. | Closed |
| "2 mecanum wheels" guidance did not explicitly state the controllability boundary for true two-wheel architecture requests. | Users could misread alias handling as approval for two-wheel holonomic drivetrain equivalence. | Added kinematic full-rank boundary note (3+ wheel constraint context) and explicit custom-review path for true two-wheel architecture. | Closed |
| Type-X vs Type-O wheel-arrangement sensitivity was missing from decision content. | Teams could compare load specs only and miss trajectory-precision differences driven by arrangement choice. | Added peer-reviewed arrangement evidence and made X/O declaration a required RFQ comparison field. | Closed |
| Slip- and payload-shift trajectory-error risk was not explicit in the report layer. | Procurement decisions could under-budget calibration and pilot effort for mixed-surface routes. | Added 2024 trajectory-model evidence on systematic error and linked it to pilot/calibration action gates. | Closed |
| Energy tradeoff for frequent lateral/diagonal duty was implicit but lacked source-backed framing. | Cost decisions could under-estimate energy overhead and duty-cycle impact in high-flexibility workflows. | Added peer-reviewed energy-model evidence and converted it into explicit power-budget review guidance. | Closed |
| The 3606 replacement note did not quantify active family drift across 96mm, 104mm, and 140mm options. | Teams could treat any current goBILDA mecanum SKU as one-to-one equivalent and miss speed/packaging/inertia tradeoffs. | Added family split evidence (96/104/140) with published mass/roller disclosures and explicit diameter-ratio screening guidance. | Closed |
| Legacy-to-current service-part compatibility risk was implicit and easy to miss in procurement discussions. | Spare-part BOM could be copied from 3213-3606-0001 into 3213-3606-0002 builds and fail maintenance assumptions. | Added explicit roller-pack compatibility boundary (0001 compatible, 0002 not compatible) and maintenance gate language in decision tables. | Closed |
| 4-inch alias section did not quantify same-diameter SD/BB/HD load and architecture spread on one comparable table. | Users could over-trust the 4-inch wording and miss that published same-diameter references span drastically different capacity and construction classes. | Added same-vendor 4-inch SD/BB/HD evidence (17 lb/wheel SD, 40 lb/set BB, 200 lb/wheel HD) plus roller-count and structure fields to force architecture-aware comparison. | Closed |
| 4-inch decision guidance did not explicitly force denominator normalization (per-wheel vs per-set) before ranking candidates. | Capacity ranking could be distorted by mixed units and mixed denominator bases across otherwise similar-looking 4-inch listings. | Added mandatory kg/wheel + kg/set normalization gate and cross-checked it against NIST conversion factors in method assumptions and external-fact actions. | Closed |
| Standards lifecycle transition risk (ISO 3691-4 to ISO/DIS 3691-4 and B56.5-2024 effective status) was not surfaced in wheel-level decision logic. | Teams could treat old compliance mapping as static and skip review of current system-level standards status before release planning. | Added lifecycle snapshot evidence showing ISO replacement path and active B56.5-2024 effective date, with explicit handoff from checker output to system-level compliance workflow. | Closed |
| Current goBILDA 96mm/104mm/140mm public pages disclose geometry and mass but not explicit load ratings. | Users might over-read replacement wording as equivalent load evidence and skip supplier test-basis requests. | Kept load equivalence as pending confirmation; require signed supplier load statement and test method for whichever active SKU is selected. | Pending confirmation |
| No open public standard threshold for acceptable mecanum trajectory drift was documented. | Teams may assume one generic pass/fail drift limit exists when tolerance is usually application-specific. | Kept this as pending confirmation and require project-level pilot KPI (position/yaw drift) before release. | Pending confirmation |
Report Summary: Key Conclusions
Updated May 5, 202686%-110% benchmark usage or stress index 3.7-5.2 or stability 55-69
Compared against 100kg/set reference for first-pass screening
Higher index means increased roller stress and wear risk
Rubber roller on Mixed concrete with joints
- Indoor AGV routes with floor joints around or below 2 mm.
- Projects that need quick pre-screening before detailed supplier validation.
- Teams comparing 100mm baseline options while needing a clear, no-new-route answer for 3606 series mecanum wheel set, 2 mecanum wheels, 2 inch mecanum wheels, 3 inch mecanum wheels, 4 inch mecanum wheels, and mecanum wheels 4 inch intent.
- Outdoor or contamination-heavy lanes without reliable floor and wear data.
- Scenarios requiring final compliance evidence without system-level safety work.
- High-shock missions where benchmark usage consistently exceeds 110%.
- Sustained routes above 10% grade without dedicated pilot and engineering review.
2 mecanum wheels / 2in mecanum wheels: Canonical Alias Boundary
Alias intent answered on /products/mecanum-wheels| Check item | Known value | Decision impact |
|---|---|---|
| Alias mapping | 2 mecanum wheels / 2in mecanum wheels -> mecanum wheel | Keep one canonical URL and avoid duplicate pages |
| Query disambiguation | `2 mecanum wheels` / `2in mecanum wheels` can mean quantity request or 2-inch shorthand | Confirm quantity + duty role first, then use 50.8mm boundary logic when diameter intent is confirmed |
| Nominal diameter conversion | 2 in = 50.8 mm | Use as boundary context before applying 100mm baseline assumptions |
| Intent-role ambiguity | Some 2.25 in mecanum SKUs are listed for intake or conveyor roles | Confirm drive-wheel duty before comparing lifecycle and load claims |
| Holonomic architecture boundary | Omnidirectional full-rank condition is discussed in 3+ wheel context; query wording alone does not define a two-wheel drivetrain as equivalent | Route true two-wheel architecture requests to custom engineering review instead of direct benchmark reuse |
| Arrangement sensitivity | Published tests report Type-X arrangement with better tracking/stability than Type-O in several motion modes | Confirm X/O arrangement and left/right wheel orientation before supplier comparison |
| Trajectory non-ideality | Recent studies report systematic tracking error from non-ideal friction, velocity changes, center-of-mass shifts, and surface differences | Add mixed-surface and payload-shift pilot scenarios before release commitment |
| Tool screening envelope | 45-140 mm (input guardrail) | 2 mecanum wheels / 2-inch intent is calculable as boundary input, then routed to custom review when confidence is low or load evidence is incomplete |
| Open public universal 2-mecanum/2-inch load limit | N/A (public evidence not universal) | Treat as pending confirmation and require supplier fatigue + pilot data |
| Open public universal trajectory-drift limit | N/A (no universal component-level threshold found in open sources) | Define project-specific drift KPI and validate in pilot acceptance |
| Public data completeness | Some 48-75mm listings publish geometry but no explicit load rating | Mark as pending confirmation until signed load statement + test method are available |
Sources for this alias boundary and disambiguation: NIST Appendix B.8, AndyMark 2.25 in intake wheel page, DFRobot 48/60mm pages, REV 75mm page, Symmetry topological and energy-model papers, Proc IMechE arrangement study, and MMT 2024 friction-model study (checked 2026-04-27).
Applicable: teams using this alias for early sourcing research and needing one canonical decision workflow for both `2 mecanum wheels` and `2 inch mecanum wheels` wording.
Not applicable: direct release decisions without supplier load reports, pilot wear trend, and route-floor measurements. Also not applicable for treating ambiguous two-wheel wording as an approved two-wheel holonomic drivetrain architecture.
3 inch mecanum wheels: Canonical Alias Boundary
Alias intent answered on /products/mecanum-wheels| Check item | Known value | Decision impact |
|---|---|---|
| Alias mapping | 3 inch mecanum wheels -> mecanum wheel | Keep one canonical URL and avoid duplicate intent routes |
| Exact conversion anchor | 3 in = 76.2 mm | Use exact conversion for consistent RFQ and supplier communication |
| Baseline delta | 100 mm baseline - 76.2 mm = 23.8 mm | Treat as non-baseline diameter; keep boundary warning active |
| Public architecture signal | 3-inch listing publishes 8 rollers and notes all 4 wheels are required | Do not infer valid two-wheel drivetrain behavior from 3-inch alias wording |
| Published load reference | AndyMark 3 in BB lists 40 lb/set of 4 (~18.1 kg/set after NIST conversion) | Treat as a light-duty SKU signal, not as industrial-class equivalence to 100mm baselines |
| Context caveat on listing | 3-inch listing is optimized for FTC chassis and the 1/2 in hex option is flagged for limited torque / light-duty use | Require supplier load basis, duty definition, and pilot evidence before release or PO decisions |
| Neighbor-size caution | 48-75mm references may publish geometry but not load rating | Prevent geometry-only listings from entering capacity ranking |
| Tool screening envelope | 45-140 mm (input guardrail) | 76.2 mm is calculable here but output remains pre-screening until pilot and supplier evidence close |
| Open public universal 3-inch load limit | N/A (no universal public limit) | Keep release gate on route-specific pilot wear trend and fatigue evidence |
Sources for this alias boundary: NIST Appendix B.8/B.9 conversion anchors, AndyMark 3-inch BB listing (8 rollers, 40 lb/set, light-duty caveat), and AndyMark 4 in SD listing for same-vendor size-class comparison (checked 2026-04-29).
Applicable: teams using `3 inch mecanum wheels` as search phrasing and needing one canonical checker workflow with explicit conversion and boundary interpretation.
Not applicable: direct PO decisions without supplier load declaration, fatigue test context, and mixed-surface pilot validation for the target route.
4 inch mecanum wheels: Canonical Alias Boundary
Alias intent answered on /products/mecanum-wheels| Check item | Known value | Decision impact |
|---|---|---|
| Alias mapping | 4 inch mecanum wheels -> mecanum wheel | Keep one canonical URL and avoid duplicate intent routes |
| Exact conversion anchor | 4 in = 101.6 mm | Use exact conversion for RFQ wording and supplier comparison consistency |
| Baseline delta | 101.6 mm - 100 mm = +1.6 mm | Close to baseline but still non-identical; keep boundary interpretation visible |
| Baseline ratio | 101.6 / 100 = 1.016 | Diameter ratio can shift linear speed by ~1.6% at equal wheel rpm in first-pass screening |
| Public 100mm load-spread signal | 45 kg/set to 100 kg/set on published 100mm-class examples | Do not treat 4-inch alias wording as automatic load-equivalence proof |
| Same-diameter 4-inch spread | AndyMark SD 17 lb/wheel (50 lb/set), BB 40 lb/set, and HD 200 lb/wheel (800 lb/set) | Same 4-inch wording can span major capacity and architecture differences; do not rank by diameter label alone |
| Denominator normalization gate | Public pages mix lb/wheel and lb/set disclosures across SD/BB/HD | Normalize to both kg/wheel and kg/set before any shortlist ranking or margin calculation |
| Architecture variance within 4 in | SD (6 dual rollers), BB (12 rollers), HD (9 rollers + steel plate structure) | Make roller count, width, bore type, and torque caveats mandatory RFQ comparison fields |
| System-standard lifecycle signal | ISO page marks 3691-4 as to be replaced by ISO/DIS 3691-4; ITSDF lists B56.5-2024 effective on 2025-12-16 | Keep checker output as component pre-screen and re-validate system-level compliance mapping before release |
| Tool screening envelope | 45-140 mm (input guardrail) | 101.6mm can run directly in the checker; low confidence still forces pilot + engineering review |
| Open public universal 4-inch load limit | N/A (no universal public limit) | Keep supplier load/test-method evidence mandatory before PO or release |
Sources for this alias boundary: NIST Appendix B.8/B.9, AndyMark 4 in SD/BB/HD listings (load denominator + architecture spread), Nexus 100mm references, ISO 3691-4 lifecycle page, ISO/DIS 3691-4 page, and ITSDF B56 standards page (checked through 2026-05-05).
Applicable: teams searching `4 inch mecanum wheels` and needing one canonical checker path with exact conversion and boundary-safe interpretation.
Not applicable: direct release or PO decisions that skip supplier load declaration, denominator normalization, test-method disclosure, and pilot wear evidence; also not applicable for system-level compliance sign-off without current ISO/B56 standards review.
3606 series mecanum wheel set: Canonical Alias Boundary
Alias intent answered on /products/mecanum-wheels| Check item | Known value | Decision impact |
|---|---|---|
| Alias mapping | 3606 series mecanum wheel set -> mecanum wheel | Keep one canonical URL and avoid duplicate intent routes |
| Canonical route | /products/mecanum-wheels | One tool layer and one report layer for this legacy SKU phrase |
| Legacy diameter cue | 100 mm (legacy 3606 listing) | Start with 100mm baseline assumptions, then confirm active supplier geometry before RFQ |
| Lifecycle status | Legacy 3606 listing is marked discontinued | Force active-SKU verification; do not treat legacy wording as current release evidence |
| Replacement signal | Replacement pointer references 96mm series (3213-3606-0002) | Diameter-class drift can change speed/load assumptions, so keep boundary review mandatory |
| Current family split | Public family now spans 96mm (3213-3606-0002), 104mm GripForce (3625-0202-0104), and 140mm (3213-3606-0003) | Replacement is not a single-SKU class; compare diameter, roller architecture, durometer, and packaging constraints before PO |
| Published mass clue | 315 g each (legacy 3606) vs 207 g each (96mm replacement) | Mechanical architecture differs across generations; avoid one-to-one lifecycle carryover |
| Derived diameter effect (same wheel rpm) | 96/100 = 0.96, 104/100 = 1.04, 140/100 = 1.40 | Use only as first-pass speed/force trend check, then validate motor current/thermal and cycle-time on the actual drivetrain |
| Service-part compatibility | 40-pack roller note: compatible with 3213-3606-0001 and not 3213-3606-0002 | Legacy spare inventory may not carry over; lock generation-specific service BOM before launch |
| Public load disclosure on active family | 96mm/104mm/140mm public pages show geometry + mass, but no explicit load-capacity field | Treat direct capacity ranking as pending confirmation until supplier load statement and test method are provided |
| Public universal load-equivalence bridge | N/A (open source not universal) | Require current supplier load statement + test method before PO |
| Tool screening envelope | 45-140 mm (input guardrail) | 3606 alias can run as first-pass 100mm screening, then move to active-SKU evidence gate |
Sources for this alias boundary: ServoCity/goBILDA 3606 listing (100mm, discontinued), goBILDA 96mm/104mm/140mm listings (mass/geometry/family split), ServoCity roller-pack compatibility note (0001 vs 0002), and ServoCity discontinued table confirmation for 3213-3606-0001 (checked 2026-05-05).
Applicable: teams receiving legacy `3606 series mecanum wheel set` wording in RFQ notes and needing one canonical checker workflow with explicit replacement/lifecycle boundaries.
Not applicable: direct PO or release decisions based only on legacy SKU naming without current supplier load declaration, test method, and pilot evidence.
Methodology and Evidence
1) Dynamic load/wheel = static load x safety factor x speed factor x joint factor x grade factor x floor factor.
2) Benchmark usage % = dynamic load/set / 100kg primary benchmark, with a secondary 45kg lower-reference check.
3) Stress index = load/roller x diameter ratio x material multiplier.
4) Stability score penalizes floor roughness, joints, speed, route grade, and long daily distance.
| Assumption | Value | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| Benchmark set load | 45-100 kg/set (public 100mm examples) | Nexus 100mm references show large within-class spread; this tool uses 100kg/set as primary benchmark and 45kg as lower-reference guardrail |
| Light-duty counterexample | 15 kg class (97mm) | DFRobot 97mm reference prevents treating "mecanum wheel" as one universal industrial class |
| Speed factor coefficient | 0.08 per m/s | Conservative amplification for lateral motion in first-pass sizing |
| Joint factor coefficient | 0.02 per mm | Approximates repeated seam impact sensitivity |
| Grade factor coefficient | 0.015 per % grade | Makes slope impact explicit and aligns warning logic to 1910.178(n) grade-travel boundary (above 10%). |
| Cross-vendor unit normalization | 1 lb = 0.4535924 kg | Uses NIST SI factor so lb/wheel and kg/set claims can be compared on one basis. |
| Stress-index thresholds | 3.6 / 5.2 | Engineering heuristics; no matching open standard cutoffs found, so final release requires supplier and pilot evidence |
| Regulatory operation boundary | Grade/surface constraints per OSHA 1910.178 | Regulation informs route-risk inputs but does not replace wheel durability validation |
| Alias normalization | 2 in = 50.8 mm, 3 in = 76.2 mm, and 4 in = 101.6 mm (exact conversion) | NIST Appendix B.8 gives exact inch conversion, so 2/3/4-inch alias mapping remains auditable and reproducible. |
| 4-inch denominator normalization | Normalize mixed claims to both kg/wheel and kg/set before ranking | Public 4-inch SD/BB/HD listings mix per-wheel and per-set claims; unnormalized comparison can invert candidate ranking. |
| 4-inch architecture guardrail | Roller count, width, bore type, and torque caveats are mandatory comparison fields | Same 4-inch nominal diameter appears in materially different architectures, so diameter-only screening is insufficient. |
| 3606-series legacy handling | Treat "3606 series mecanum wheel set" as legacy 100mm intent on this URL | Public listing metadata marks the 3606 set as discontinued and points to a 96mm replacement, so legacy naming must be mapped with explicit lifecycle boundary notes. |
| Legacy-to-current diameter ratio screen | Use published-diameter ratios for first-pass change estimates (96/100, 104/100, 140/100) | Linear speed scales with wheel diameter at equal wheel rpm; this is a quick boundary check, not a substitute for drivetrain validation. |
| Service-part generation lock | Treat 3213-3606-0001 and 3213-3606-0002 roller service parts as non-interchangeable unless supplier confirms otherwise | Public compatibility note on the 40-pack roller listing blocks default carryover of legacy spare-part BOM assumptions. |
| Role disambiguation | Confirm drive-wheel vs intake-wheel duty before comparison | Small-diameter mecanum listings can represent non-drive components, which invalidates drivetrain benchmarking if mixed directly. |
| Missing load-rating handling | No explicit load value = pending confirmation | Geometry-only listings cannot be normalized into reliable kg/wheel or kg/set comparisons. |
| Holonomic architecture boundary | Treat two-wheel wording as ambiguous; full-rank omnidirectional control needs 3+ wheel constraint context | Alias intent resolution does not certify two-wheel drivetrain controllability equivalence. |
| Arrangement sensitivity | Type-X and Type-O layouts are not interchangeable by default | Published arrangement testing reports different precision/stability behavior across motion patterns. |
| Trajectory non-ideality | Velocity, center-of-mass, and surface changes can cause systematic tracking error | Recent friction-model and slippage studies show idealized kinematics alone is insufficient for release decisions. |
| Energy tradeoff | Higher maneuver flexibility can increase energy demand | Peer-reviewed energy modeling indicates path/control strategy materially affects power consumption. |
| Standards lifecycle tracking | Re-check ISO 3691-4 and ANSI/ITSDF B56.5 lifecycle/effective status before release | Public lifecycle metadata now shows ISO 3691-4 replacement progression and active B56.5-2024 effective status. |
| Source | Use |
|---|---|
| US Patent US3876255A (Mecanum wheel, Bengt Ilon) Patent publication 1975-04-08, checked 2026-04-26 | Primary origin source describing angled rollers and uninterrupted wheel periphery concept. Primary patent text and drawings are public. |
| CMU RI publication: Kinematic Modeling of Wheeled Mobile Robots Journal article date 1987-04, repository page checked 2026-04-26 | Peer-reviewed kinematic framework introducing wheel Jacobian mapping used to justify model structure. Academic primary source for kinematic formulation, but not a product-durability test. |
| Nexus Robot NM100A heavy-duty 100mm mecanum wheel Product page checked 2026-04-26 | Public product data for 100mm wheel: 8 rollers, PU-coated roller, and 100kg/set claim. Manufacturer page with downloadable datasheet references; load statement treated as product-level claim. |
| Nexus Robot 100mm bearing-roller set (14094) Product page checked 2026-04-26 | Counterexample within same nominal 100mm class: 9 rollers and 45kg/set published load. Manufacturer page gives structured spec table; claim remains vendor-specific. |
| DFRobot 97mm Mecanum Wheel Product page checked 2026-04-26 | Published dimensions and material for 97mm wheel: 45° roller angle, 15kg load class, silicone-rubber roller. Manufacturer page with basic dimensions and load data. |
| AndyMark MecanumWheelSpecSheet (6/8/10 in) Spec sheet checked 2026-04-26 | Cross-size load ratings (80/80/440 lb per wheel) showing load does not scale linearly by diameter. Manufacturer reference for a specific product family; converted values still require use-case normalization. |
| AndyMark 4 in Wheel Durability White Paper White paper checked 2026-04-26 | Public test notes with payload and drop-test outcomes used for impact-risk boundary setting. Single-vendor FTC-oriented test context; useful as caution signal, not universal lifecycle limit. |
| NIST Guide to SI Appendix B.9 NIST page checked 2026-04-26 | Exact conversion baseline for imperial-to-metric mass normalization: lb to kg factor 4.535924E-01. US national metrology source, suitable for cross-vendor unit normalization. |
| ISO 3691-4:2023 Edition 2 published 2023-06, ISO page checked 2026-04-26 | Safety scope baseline for driverless industrial trucks and system-level risk controls. Public abstract available; full standard clauses are paywalled. |
| ANSI/ITSDF B56.5-2024 (ITSDF standards page) ITSDF page checked 2026-04-26 | US driverless AGV standard title/scope and effective date (2025-12-16) for procurement-gate mapping. Publisher-maintained standards listing; full technical clauses still require full document review. |
| eCFR 29 CFR 1910.178(n) traveling clauses eCFR page checked 2026-04-26 | Operational constraints used as boundary triggers: >10% grade handling, wet/slippery-floor slowdown, and grade travel posture. Authoritative federal codification (eCFR is authoritative but unofficial online edition). |
| OSHA Powered Industrial Truck Operator Training Final Rule Federal Register publication 1998-12-01, page checked 2026-04-26 | Training-content baseline requiring workplace topics such as ramps/sloped surfaces and surface conditions. Primary OSHA final-rule text; useful for operator-training boundary, not wheel-component rating. |
| OSHA PIT eTool: Physical Conditions OSHA page checked 2026-04-26 | Operational floor prerequisites: surface strength, hole/obstruction control, and loading-limit checks. Public guidance content from OSHA. |
| NIST Guide to SI Appendix B.8 NIST page modified 2025-08-18, checked 2026-04-29 | Exact inch conversion anchor used for alias boundary mapping: 1 in = 2.54E-02 m (exact), so 2 in = 50.8 mm, 3 in = 76.2 mm, and 4 in = 101.6 mm. US national metrology source for exact inch-to-metric conversion. |
| ServoCity / goBILDA 3606 series mecanum wheel set page Product page checked 2026-05-05 | Legacy alias evidence: title states 100mm diameter and page status marks this 3606 set as discontinued with a replacement pointer to a 96mm set. Manufacturer-owned listing metadata is useful for alias and lifecycle status, but not a universal durability certification. |
| goBILDA 96mm mecanum wheel set (3213-3606-0002) Product page checked 2026-05-05 | Replacement-reference page for the discontinued 3606 set; publishes 96mm diameter and 207g-each mass for current-series comparison context. Manufacturer product listing is suitable for current-SKU context, but does not establish universal load-rating equivalence. |
| goBILDA 140mm mecanum wheel set (3213-3606-0003) Product page checked 2026-05-05 | Public page discloses 16 rollers, 37mm width, 383g each, and tech-tip notes on swapping from 96mm with a chassis-length caveat. Manufacturer listing provides geometry and integration notes, but does not publish a universal load rating. |
| goBILDA GripForce 104mm mecanum wheel set (3625-0202-0104) Product page checked 2026-05-05 | Public page discloses 104mm diameter, 40A durometer, 11 rollers, 236g each, and states 96mm was the prior standard in this family. Manufacturer listing is primary for family-positioning and geometry disclosure; load-rating equivalence is still not declared. |
| ServoCity mecanum roller pack compatibility note (40-pack) Product page checked 2026-05-05 | Service-parts note states rollers are compatible with 3213-3606-0001 and not 3213-3606-0002, adding a maintenance compatibility boundary. Manufacturer parts page provides SKU-level compatibility language suitable for maintenance-risk screening. |
| ServoCity discontinued products table (3213-3606-0001) Discontinued table checked 2026-05-05 | Cross-page lifecycle confirmation that SKU 3213-3606-0001 remains listed in discontinued catalog records. Manufacturer-maintained lifecycle index strengthens alias-to-status traceability. |
| AndyMark 3 in BB Mecanum Wheels Product page checked 2026-04-29 | 3-inch listing publishes diameter, width, 8 rollers, and 40 lb per set of 4 weight capacity, and states that all 4 wheels are required for intended drive behavior. Manufacturer listing includes geometry plus a SKU-level load claim, and also flags limited torque capacity/light-duty guidance for the 1/2 in hex option. |
| AndyMark 4 in SD Mecanum Wheel Product page checked 2026-05-05 | 4-inch listing publishes 17 lb per wheel (50 lb per set of 4) and explicitly routes heavier-use cases to the HD set. Same-vendor reference for size/class comparison; still SKU-specific and competition-context oriented. |
| AndyMark 4 in BB Mecanum Wheels Product page checked 2026-05-05 | 4-inch BB listing publishes 40 lb per set of 4, 12 rollers, and a limited-torque caveat on molded hex bores. Manufacturer listing provides direct same-diameter architecture context, but remains SKU-specific and competition-context oriented. |
| AndyMark 4 in HD Mecanum Wheels Product page checked 2026-05-05 | 4-inch HD listing publishes 200 lb per wheel, 9 rollers, and explicit X-pattern/all-4-wheel configuration guidance for holonomic drive behavior. Manufacturer listing is primary for published capacity and architecture fields; still requires denominator normalization and duty-context matching. |
| AndyMark 2.25 in HD Mecanum Vectored Intake Wheel Product page checked 2026-04-27 | Product is explicitly positioned for front intake/conveyor use with 6 rollers, showing that small-diameter mecanum listings can be non-drive components. Manufacturer page with explicit use-case text for intake workflows. |
| DFRobot 60mm Black Mecanum Wheel with Motor Shaft Coupling Product page checked 2026-04-27 | Small-size reference with published 15kg load capacity, 60mm diameter, 9 rollers, and 45 degree roller geometry. Manufacturer page with structured dimensional and load information. |
| DFRobot 48mm Mecanum Wheel Kit Product page checked 2026-04-27 | Public listing shows 48mm class and 9-roller architecture, while public page does not publish an explicit load rating in its specification table. Manufacturer page confirms geometry but leaves load evidence incomplete in open specs. |
| REV 75mm Mecanum Wheel Set Product page checked 2026-04-27 | Public mechanical data includes 75mm diameter, 40mm width, and wheel mass, but no explicit load-capacity value. Manufacturer page is primary for disclosed geometry and non-disclosed load limits. |
| TENTE industrial mecanum wheel solutions brochure Brochure checked 2026-04-27 | Industrial guidance states load capacities vary by diameter and application constraints, and recommends on-site analysis/prototyping before release. Manufacturer industrial brochure; supports boundary framing, not a universal pass/fail limit. |
| ISO 3691-4:2023 lifecycle snapshot (ISO page) ISO page checked 2026-05-05 | ISO 3691-4 page currently marks the document as "Will be replaced by ISO/DIS 3691-4" and repeats exclusions for severe-climate, public-road, and potentially explosive operations. Publisher-managed abstract and lifecycle metadata; full clause text remains paywalled. |
| ISO/DIS 3691-4 lifecycle page ISO/DIS page checked 2026-05-05 | Draft page shows lifecycle transition from ISO 3691-4:2023 to ISO/DIS 3691-4 with the same high-level scope/exclusion framework. Publisher-managed lifecycle metadata; draft details still require formal publication review. |
| ANSI/ITSDF B56.5-2024 effective-date snapshot ITSDF page checked 2026-05-05 | ITSDF standards page lists B56.5-2024 for driverless AGV/automatic guided industrial vehicles with EFFECTIVE 12/16/25. Publisher-maintained standards listing; full technical clauses require full document review. |
| Symmetry 2019: Topological Design Methods for Mecanum Wheel Configurations Article published 2019-10-08, checked 2026-04-27 | Peer-reviewed kinematic analysis shows omnidirectional behavior requires full-rank constraints; not every wheel-count/layout combination is omnidirectional. Open-access peer-reviewed paper with explicit Jacobian-rank condition discussion. |
| Proc IMechE Part C 2019: Analysis of the Mecanum wheel arrangement of an omnidirectional vehicle Article volume year 2019, checked 2026-04-27 | Kinematic + experimental comparison reports Type-X arrangement with better precision/stability than Type-O across straight, sideways, diagonal, and revolving maneuvers. Peer-reviewed experimental evidence, but platform/control setup is not universal. |
| Mechanism and Machine Theory 193 (2024): orthotropic-friction mecanum model Issue dated 2024-03, checked 2026-04-27 | Validated non-ideal wheel model reports systematic trajectory errors under velocity, pose, and center-of-mass variations. Peer-reviewed journal source with experimental validation; error magnitudes remain setup-dependent. |
| Symmetry 2019: Energy modeling and experimental validation for four-mecanum-wheel robot Article published 2019-11-07, checked 2026-04-27 | Energy model (validated to >95% in experiments) highlights efficiency tradeoff versus motion flexibility and sensitivity to path/control strategy. Open-access peer-reviewed study with controlled-lab validation; not a universal industrial energy benchmark. |
| Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 2024: trajectory correction with slippage in mecanum AGV Published online 2024-10-22, checked 2026-04-27 | Abstract-level evidence confirms slippage can cause significant orientation deviation and that correction performance varies by road surface. Peer-reviewed source; full quantitative details are not open in the abstract page. |
| Decision question | New data point | Boundary / counterexample | Action | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Can two 100mm mecanum wheels have the same capacity by default? | Nexus publishes two 100mm references with very different claims: 45kg/set (14094) and 100kg/set (NM100A heavy duty). | Same diameter does not normalize hub design, roller architecture, or duty-cycle assumptions. | Treat diameter as a search filter only; compare using published set/wheel load plus duty definition. | Nexus NM100A page + Nexus 14094 page (checked 2026-04-26) |
| Can lb/wheel and kg/set claims be compared directly without conversion? | AndyMark publishes 80/80/440 lb per wheel (6/8/10 in), which is 36.3/36.3/199.6 kg per wheel using NIST factor 1 lb = 0.4535924 kg. | Per-wheel and per-set claims are not interchangeable; multiply by wheel count and keep unit basis explicit. | Normalize every supplier claim to one basis (kg/wheel and kg/set) before ranking options or setting safety margin. | AndyMark MecanumWheelSpecSheet + NIST SI Appendix B.9 (checked 2026-04-26) |
| Is a smaller-diameter mecanum wheel automatically unusable? | DFRobot 97mm unit publishes 45° roller angle with a 15kg load class and silicone-rubber rollers, showing it can work for light-duty tasks. | This is a light-duty example and does not support direct transfer to industrial AGV payload envelopes. | Use smaller diameter only for prototype/light payload scenarios unless industrial load evidence is provided. | DFRobot 97mm page (checked 2026-04-26) |
| Should route grade be a mandatory screening input? | eCFR 1910.178(n)(7) requires slow grade travel and specifies >10% grade handling posture for loaded trucks; 1910.178(n)(10) adds wet/slippery-floor slowdown. | These clauses are operation constraints, not wheel-fatigue acceptance thresholds. | Collect route grade in first-pass sizing and trigger mandatory pilot/engineering review when grade exceeds 10%. | eCFR 29 CFR 1910 Subpart N (checked 2026-04-26) |
| Is checker output enough to satisfy US AGV safety governance? | ITSDF lists ANSI/ITSDF B56.5-2024 for driverless automatic guided industrial vehicles with effective date 2025-12-16. | Standard title/scope confirms system-level requirements; checker output alone is not a conformity certificate. | Map checker result to formal standard track (ISO 3691-4 and/or B56.5) before release decisions. | ITSDF B56 standards page (checked 2026-04-26) |
| Can training documentation ignore route slope and floor conditions? | OSHA final rule for 1910.178(l) lists workplace training topics including surface conditions and ramps/sloped surfaces. | Training obligations do not set numeric wheel-rating limits by themselves. | Treat unknown slope/surface data as low-confidence input and block direct PO without field measurement. | OSHA PIT Operator Training Final Rule (checked 2026-04-26) |
| Can one heavy-duty claim replace duty validation? | AndyMark published load references span 80 to 440 lb per wheel across wheel sizes, showing architecture-specific rating spread. | Material hardness and one vendor architecture do not capture floor shock spectrum, route profile, or maintenance interval. | Require both product-level load/hardness data and route-level pilot evidence before release. | AndyMark product references + Mecanum spec sheet (checked 2026-04-26) |
| What is a public shock-risk signal for mecanum rollers under abuse? | AndyMark white paper reports reduced strafing at 70lb in FTC tests and roller-spindle breakage after a 12-inch concrete drop. | Test context is FTC-scale and single-vendor; use as caution evidence, not a universal lifecycle model. | If your route includes recurrent impacts, force a pilot gate before purchase commitment. | AndyMark durability white paper (checked 2026-04-26) |
| Can floor-joint and slope data be skipped during first-pass selection? | OSHA 1910.178 specifies grade-handling constraints (including >10% grade loading orientation) and cautions on wet/slippery travel speed. | These are operation-safety constraints and do not replace component fatigue or thermal validation. | Keep floor-joint and slope as mandatory inputs; unknown values should reduce confidence and trigger pilot. | eCFR 1910.178 + OSHA PIT physical conditions eTool (checked 2026-04-26) |
| Does this checker replace system-level AGV compliance work? | ISO 3691-4:2023 scope targets driverless industrial truck systems, not a wheel-only pass/fail certificate. | Public abstract is available, but full clauses are paywalled and still must be handled in formal compliance workflow. | Use checker output as component pre-screen input to ISO/plant safety processes, not as final conformity evidence. | ISO 3691-4 page (checked 2026-04-26) |
| Are the fit thresholds in this page an official standard requirement? | No open public source was found with identical 85%/110% benchmark bands or stress-index cutoffs. | These thresholds are engineering heuristics for pre-screening only. | Status pending confirmation: keep supplier fatigue report and pilot trend as release gate. | Source audit updated 2026-04-26; detailed clauses on many standards are paywalled |
| Should "4 inch mecanum wheels" be split into a separate URL from the canonical mecanum wheel page? | NIST Appendix B.8 defines 4 in as exactly 101.6 mm, while this canonical tool baseline is 100 mm, so 4-inch wording is diameter-alias intent with a small but explicit normalization delta. | 4-inch wording alignment does not mean every 100mm-class SKU is equivalent in load architecture, roller geometry, or duty limits. | Keep 4-inch intent on this canonical URL, run 101.6mm as boundary input, and require supplier load/test evidence before release decisions. | NIST SP 811 Appendix B.8 + Nexus 100mm references (checked through 2026-05-05) |
| Can two 4-inch mecanum listings be treated as the same capacity class by default? | Same-vendor 4-inch pages disclose large spread: SD lists 17 lb/wheel and 50 lb/set of 4, BB lists 40 lb/set of 4, and HD lists 200 lb/wheel (800 lb/set of 4), which is about 7.7/22.7 kg, 18.1 kg/set, and 90.7/362.9 kg after NIST conversion. | These values come from different constructions (SD/BB/HD) and duty contexts, so diameter alone cannot establish equivalent lifecycle margin. | Force architecture + duty comparison before PO: roller count, width, bore type, torque caveats, plus normalized kg/wheel and kg/set. | AndyMark 4 in SD + 4 in BB + 4 in HD pages + NIST SP 811 Appendix B.9 (checked 2026-05-05) |
| Does the 4-inch class carry uniform drivetrain architecture assumptions? | Public 4-inch references show SD with 6 dual rollers, BB with 12 rollers, and HD with 9 rollers plus explicit X-pattern and all-4-wheel guidance for holonomic drive behavior. | Roller-count and assembly differences are architecture signals, not direct proof of route-level durability or compliance. | Keep 4-inch query handling on this URL but block release decisions until architecture fields and pilot wear evidence are captured in RFQ records. | AndyMark 4 in SD + 4 in BB + 4 in HD pages (checked 2026-05-05) |
| Is the AGV standards mapping for this checker static after one-time setup? | ISO 3691-4:2023 public lifecycle metadata states "Will be replaced by ISO/DIS 3691-4", and ITSDF lists ANSI/ITSDF B56.5-2024 as EFFECTIVE 12/16/25. | Lifecycle metadata and title/abstract scope do not replace clause-level compliance engineering for your exact operating envelope. | Treat checker output as component pre-screen only, then route to current system-level standard review with revision tracking in project compliance logs. | ISO 3691-4 page + ISO/DIS 3691-4 page + ITSDF B56 standards page (checked 2026-05-05) |
| Is there one open public 4-inch mecanum test protocol that harmonizes SD/BB/HD capacity claims? | This audit did not find a single open, cross-vendor component test protocol that normalizes all 4-inch SD/BB/HD load claims into one transferable pass/fail number. | Absence of a public harmonized protocol does not invalidate supplier claims; it means cross-SKU comparability remains incomplete without supplier method disclosure. | Mark cross-family ranking as pending confirmation until supplier test method, denominator basis, and pilot acceptance metrics are documented. | AndyMark 4 in SD/BB/HD public listings + standards-source audit (checked 2026-05-05) |
| Is the 2-inch alias conversion only an approximation? | NIST Appendix B.8 marks inch conversion as exact (1 in = 2.54E-02 m), so 2 in maps exactly to 50.8 mm. | Exact conversion aligns wording but does not imply identical wheel architecture or load class. | Use 50.8 mm as alias normalization only, then evaluate capacity using wheel-specific load evidence. | NIST SP 811 Appendix B.8 (checked 2026-04-27) |
| How should "3606 series mecanum wheel set" intent be handled on this URL? | The ServoCity/goBILDA 3606 listing states a 100mm diameter set and marks the item as discontinued, with a replacement pointer to a 96mm wheel set. | Legacy SKU wording helps intent mapping, but the public listing does not provide a universal load-equivalence bridge to all current 100mm options. | Keep one canonical URL, map 3606 intent to this checker, and require current supplier load/test evidence before PO or release decisions. | ServoCity 3606 listing + replacement pointer (checked 2026-05-05) |
| Can the 96mm replacement pointer be treated as one-to-one kinematic equivalence to legacy 100mm wording? | Public specs show 100mm legacy at 315g each and 96mm replacement at 207g each; diameter ratio is 0.96, so equal wheel-rpm screening implies about 4% lower linear speed and about 4.2% higher contact-force leverage for the 96mm option. | This ratio is a geometry-derived pre-screen and does not replace drivetrain efficiency, current draw, or thermal validation. | Use diameter-ratio math as initial screening only, then confirm cycle-time and motor-margin impact on the actual platform before PO. | ServoCity 3606 page + goBILDA 96mm page (checked 2026-05-05) |
| Does one replacement SKU fully represent the current goBILDA mecanum family for legacy 3606 requests? | Public family references currently span 96mm (207g each), 104mm GripForce (40A, 11 rollers, 236g each), and 140mm (16 rollers, 37mm width, 383g each with 96mm swap note). | These listings show different geometry, roller architecture, and intended context; family membership does not equal drop-in equivalence. | Force SKU-specific comparison fields (diameter, roller count, durometer, mass, width/offset notes) before approving legacy-to-current substitution. | goBILDA 96mm/104mm/140mm pages (checked 2026-05-05) |
| Is spare-part interchangeability guaranteed between 3213-3606-0001 and 3213-3606-0002? | ServoCity 40-pack roller listing explicitly says compatibility with 3213-3606-0001 and non-compatibility with 3213-3606-0002. | This is a SKU-specific service-part statement, not a general rule for all mecanum families. | Lock replacement decisions with a generation-matched spare-parts BOM and service-kit plan before launch. | ServoCity roller-pack page (checked 2026-05-05) |
| Do public goBILDA 96mm/104mm/140mm pages publish explicit load-capacity values for direct ranking? | As of 2026-05-05 audit, public pages disclose geometry and mass but no explicit load-capacity field on those three listings. | Absence on public pages does not prove no internal rating exists; it only means open-source comparison remains incomplete. | Keep load ranking under pending confirmation until supplier load statement and test method are provided for the selected SKU. | goBILDA 96mm/104mm/140mm pages (checked 2026-05-05) |
| Can "3 inch mecanum wheels" be treated as a separate URL or direct 100mm equivalent? | NIST exact conversion maps 3 in to 76.2 mm, and AndyMark 3 in BB listing publishes 8 rollers plus 40 lb per set of 4 (~18.1 kg/set after NIST conversion) with all-4-wheel configuration notes. | Alias wording and diameter conversion do not provide industrial equivalence; this specific 3-inch listing is optimized for FTC/light-duty context and flags limited torque capacity for one bore option. | Keep one canonical URL, run 76.2 mm as boundary-intent screening, normalize lb-to-kg, and require supplier load basis plus pilot wear evidence before release decisions. | NIST SP 811 Appendix B.8/B.9 + AndyMark 3 in BB page (checked 2026-04-29) |
| Does published 3-inch load data remove the need for diameter-class comparison against 100mm options? | Same-vendor AndyMark pages show 3 in BB at 40 lb/set versus 4 in SD at 50 lb/set, and the 4 in SD page explicitly routes heavier-use cases to an HD set. | These are SKU-level competition-context values, not universal industrial thresholds. | Use set-level load normalization and duty context as mandatory comparison fields; do not extrapolate one 3-inch listing to all 3-inch candidates. | AndyMark 3 in BB + 4 in SD pages (checked 2026-04-29) |
| Can 2-inch-class and 100mm mecanum wheels be treated as one load class? | DFRobot 60mm listing publishes 15kg load capacity, while 100mm public references on this page span 45-100kg/set classes. | Diameter class and duty context create large load spread; small-size references are not direct industrial substitutes. | Separate short-listing by duty class first, then compare geometry/material/load method before quote decisions. | DFRobot 60mm page + Nexus 100mm references (checked through 2026-04-27) |
| Does the phrase "2 mecanum wheels" always imply drivetrain wheels? | AndyMark 2.25 in HD mecanum listing is framed as an intake/conveyor wheel with 6 rollers, not as an AGV drive baseline. | Intent-level keyword match does not guarantee equivalent mechanical role in the drivetrain or a diameter-specific interpretation. | Confirm query meaning (quantity vs diameter) and role (drive, intake, or transfer mechanism) before any load or lifecycle comparison. | AndyMark 2.25 in intake wheel page (checked 2026-04-27) |
| Can supplier pages without load ratings still enter numeric capacity ranking? | REV 75mm and DFRobot 48mm public pages disclose geometry but do not publish explicit load-capacity values in open specs. | Without declared load basis and test method, reproducible kg/wheel or kg/set normalization is impossible. | Mark these candidates as pending confirmation and require signed load statement plus test method before PO. | REV 75mm page + DFRobot 48mm page (checked 2026-04-27) |
| Can a single published value be reused across all industrial 2-inch-like deployments? | TENTE industrial brochure states load capacities depend on wheel diameter and application conditions and recommends on-site analysis/prototyping. | Industrial suitability is system-level and route-specific; catalog snippets alone are insufficient. | Route any high-impact deployment to prototype validation before release commitments. | TENTE mecanum solutions brochure (checked 2026-04-27) |
| Can "2 mecanum wheels" be treated as a complete holonomic-drive decision by default? | A 2019 peer-reviewed topological analysis states omnidirectional behavior depends on full-rank wheel constraints (n >= 3 context), so two-wheel wording is not enough to infer full holonomic drivetrain capability. | This is a kinematic boundary, not a direct durability/load rating; it still needs drivetrain-specific implementation review. | Treat the alias query as intent disambiguation only and force custom engineering review for true two-wheel architecture requests. | Symmetry 11(10):1268 topological analysis (checked 2026-04-27) |
| Does wheel arrangement (Type-X vs Type-O) matter once diameter/load class are similar? | A 2019 kinematic + experimental study reports Type-X arrangement with higher stiffness index and better tracking/stability than Type-O across multiple motion modes. | Study context is a specific platform/control stack; results are directionally useful but not universal for every chassis. | Require suppliers/integrators to declare arrangement mode and include arrangement-specific validation in pilot acceptance. | Proc IMechE Part C 233(15), doi:10.1177/0954406219836358 (checked 2026-04-27) |
| Can ideal kinematic equations alone guarantee trajectory accuracy on mixed routes? | A 2024 mecanum friction-model study shows systematic trajectory errors under changes in velocity, platform pose, and center-of-mass, and uses experiments to validate non-ideal behavior. | Error magnitude remains platform- and surface-dependent; abstracted equations cannot replace route-specific testing. | Add payload-shift and mixed-surface pilot scenarios before release, with calibration tasks captured in RFQ scope. | Mechanism and Machine Theory 193 (2024) 105548, checked 2026-04-27 |
| Is mecanum flexibility free from measurable energy tradeoff in high-maneuver workflows? | A 2019 four-mecanum energy model (validated to >95% in experiments) explicitly models flexibility-efficiency tradeoff and path/control dependence of energy use. | Experimental setup is lab-scale and control-strategy dependent; do not treat one value as universal plant energy cost. | Include motion-profile and energy-budget review in sourcing decisions, especially for routes dominated by lateral/diagonal maneuvers. | Symmetry 11(11):1372 (checked 2026-04-27) |
| Is there a universal public pass/fail threshold for mecanum trajectory drift? | This stage1b audit found no open ISO/ANSI component-level numeric limit that can be applied as a universal drift threshold for mecanum wheel modules. | Available studies report setup-specific tracking behavior and correction effectiveness across surfaces. | Mark drift criteria as pending confirmation and define project-specific pilot acceptance KPIs before PO. | Source audit updated 2026-04-27; open standards pages checked for public scope only |
Time marker: references above were checked through 2026-05-05.
Comparison, Boundaries, and Risks
| Option | Published load reference | Wear risk | Best fit | Evidence status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 100mm rubber roller mecanum | 45-100 kg/set public 100mm references | Medium | Indoor AGV with controlled floor quality | Public product-page evidence available |
| 100mm polyurethane roller mecanum | AndyMark family reference: 80-440 lb/wheel (36.3-199.6 kg/wheel) depending on wheel size | Medium-High | Higher wear resistance need with reduced grip tolerance | Public baseline exists but not same-size apples-to-apples with 100mm references |
| 97mm hobby/light-duty mecanum | 15 kg class public example | High | Prototype education or very light payload robots | Public product-page evidence available |
| 2.25 in vectored intake mecanum (non-drive role) | AndyMark listing emphasizes intake/conveyor duty and 6-roller architecture | High for AGV drive use | Material handling intake workflows, not drivetrain load bearing | Public role description exists; not suitable as direct drive-wheel benchmark |
| 3 in mecanum listing (76.2mm alias class) | AndyMark 3 in BB publishes 40 lb/set of 4 (~18.1 kg/set) with 8 rollers and light-duty torque caveat | Medium-High (light-duty boundary) | Alias-intent normalization, early prototyping, and packaging checks before industrial-duty release decisions | Public load + geometry available, but still requires supplier load basis and route-specific pilot validation |
| 4 in SD mecanum listing (100mm nominal) | 17 lb/wheel and 50 lb/set of 4 (~7.7 kg/wheel, ~22.7 kg/set) | Medium-High (light-duty class) | Smaller/light-duty robots and early prototype motion checks, not direct transfer to heavy industrial duty | Public load and geometry available; denominator normalization and duty-context check are mandatory |
| 4 in BB mecanum listing (100mm nominal) | 40 lb/set of 4 (~18.1 kg/set), 12 rollers, slim profile | Medium-High (light-duty torque caveat) | Smooth-motion packaging and FTC-scale layouts with explicit torque and lifecycle validation | Public load/architecture available; still SKU-specific and not a universal 4-inch baseline |
| 4 in HD mecanum listing (100mm nominal) | 200 lb/wheel (~90.7 kg/wheel, ~362.9 kg/set), 9 rollers | Medium | Higher-load 4-inch applications after motor margin, floor profile, and pilot wear trend verification | Public high-capacity listing available; requires supplier method disclosure and route-level validation before release |
| 96mm replacement set (3213-3606-0002) | 96mm diameter, 70A rollers, 207g each; no explicit public load rating on listing | Medium (pending duty-specific proof) | Legacy 3606 migration only after cycle-time, packaging, and supplier load evidence checks | Pending confirmation: geometry/mass are public, but load-test basis is not disclosed on the public page |
| 104mm GripForce set (3625-0202-0104) | 104mm, 40A durometer, 11 rollers, 236g each; dedicated 44-roller service-pack ecosystem | Medium-High (softer roller lifecycle tradeoff) | High-traction / high-agility profiles where roller replacement cadence is acceptable and documented | Pending confirmation: public geometry/service-pack evidence exists, but no explicit public load rating for direct capacity ranking |
| 140mm set (3213-3606-0003) | 140mm, 16 rollers, 37mm width, 383g each; public swap note with 96mm plus chassis-length caveat | Medium (higher inertia and packaging sensitivity) | Obstacle-clearance and ground-clearance priorities after packaging and motor-margin verification | Pending confirmation: geometry and integration guidance are public, but load-test basis is not published on the public page |
| 60mm small mecanum module | 15 kg load-capacity listing (single wheel class) | High | Prototype/light-duty robotic platforms | Public product-page evidence available; do not transfer directly to industrial AGV duty |
| 48-75mm listing without explicit load rating | No explicit load value in open product specs | Unknown (information gap) | Early screening only until signed supplier load and test-method data is provided | Pending confirmation: capacity comparison blocked until load basis is disclosed |
| Custom reinforced mecanum module | No open universal benchmark | Low-Medium after validation | High-shock or beyond-boundary production use | Requires supplier report + pilot data |
| Band | Boundary | Operational fit | Action |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fit for 100mm rubber roller pre-screen | <= 85% benchmark usage and stress index <= 3.6 with stability >= 70 | Indoor AGV lanes with low floor joints and controlled lateral speed. | Proceed to RFQ with this output and request supplier drawing confirmation. |
| Borderline, verification required | 86%-110% benchmark usage or stress index 3.7-5.2 or stability 55-69 | Mixed-floor routes where roller wear and vibration trend must be verified in pilot. | Run short pilot test and request roller hardness + fatigue report before PO. |
| Not fit, move to stronger module | > 110% benchmark usage or stress index > 5.2 or stability < 55 | High shock, high cycle, or heavy payload profile beyond 100mm rubber pre-screen envelope. | Switch to reinforced/custom wheel module and perform vehicle-level validation. |
Fit thresholds are pre-screening heuristics and must be replaced by supplier fatigue evidence for final release. Load comparisons above normalize lb-to-kg using NIST SI factors. Cross-source load references were checked through 2026-05-05.
| Risk | Trigger | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|
| Misuse risk | Treating checker output as final compliance proof | Run full vehicle-level validation and applicable safety workflow |
| Benchmark overconfidence risk | Using one product benchmark as universal limit | Compare multiple supplier datasheets and pilot data before PO |
| Unit mismatch risk | Mixing kg/set and lb/wheel claims without conversion | Normalize every claim to kg/wheel and kg/set before commercial comparison |
| Slope underestimation risk | Route grade above 10% treated as normal operation | Trigger pilot + engineering review gate whenever route grade exceeds 10% |
| Cost/wear risk | Ignoring daily distance and maintenance intervals | Add wear inspection gates and maintain spare-roller stock plan |
| Scenario mismatch risk | Using smooth-floor assumptions on rough routes | Default to rough-floor assumptions until measured route data is available |
| Role mismatch risk | Treating intake-oriented 2-inch mecanum listings as drive-wheel equivalents | Confirm drivetrain role and require explicit load basis before capacity comparison |
| Arrangement mismatch risk | Reusing Type-O and Type-X layouts as if they are performance-equivalent | Lock arrangement mode in RFQ and validate arrangement-specific tracking in pilot |
| Trajectory-drift risk | Ignoring payload center-of-mass shifts and mixed surfaces while relying on ideal kinematics | Add calibration plan plus mixed-surface/payload-shift pilot criteria before PO |
| Energy-budget risk | Assuming high lateral/diagonal maneuver duty has no energy penalty | Include motion-profile energy check in sourcing and duty-cycle decisions |
| Alias dilution risk | Creating multiple near-duplicate URLs for same intent | Keep single canonical URL and route all alias intent here |
Scenario Examples
Dynamic load/set: 81.1 kg
Benchmark usage: 81%
Stress index: 1.14
Suggested class: Fit for 100mm rubber roller pre-screen
Dynamic load/set: 119.9 kg
Benchmark usage: 120%
Stress index: 1.69
Suggested class: Not fit, move to stronger module
Dynamic load/set: 207.3 kg
Benchmark usage: 207%
Stress index: 2.91
Suggested class: Not fit, move to stronger module
| Scenario | Total mass | Floor | Route grade | Benchmark usage | Stress index | Stability score | Band |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Indoor Sortation Baseline | 62 kg | Smooth epoxy floor | 1.5% | 81% | 1.14 | 79 | Fit for 100mm rubber roller pre-screen |
| Mixed-Floor Fulfillment Lane | 78 kg | Mixed concrete with joints | 4.0% | 120% | 1.69 | 58 | Not fit, move to stronger module |
| Rough Dock Transfer | 95 kg | Rough floor with repeated seam impact | 9.0% | 207% | 2.91 | 20 | Not fit, move to stronger module |
Decision FAQ
Group 1: 100mm fit scope + 3606/2/3/4 inch alias-intent clarity
Group 2: material and wear boundaries
Group 3: deployment and procurement decisions
Total questions: 31
Action Layer: Move from checker output to release decision
Keep this canonical page in your sourcing workflow: run the tool, capture boundaries, then move to pilot or RFQ with evidence attached.
Related engineering resources
Continue with boundary details, architecture trade-offs, and acceptance-criteria planning.
- 310mm mecanum wheel forklift checker
- 3606 series mecanum wheel set: canonical boundary answer
- 3 inch mecanum wheels: canonical boundary answer
- mecanum wheels 4 inch: canonical boundary answer
- 2 mecanum wheels: canonical boundary answer
- 100mm Mecanum Wheel Rubber Roller Boundary Deep Dive
- Mecanum Wheel vs Omni Wheel for AGV/AMR Platforms
- 3.25 omnidirectional wheels + 101.6mm fit checker (canonical)
- How to Define AGV Drive Wheel Acceptance Criteria Before Sampling
