View Full Version : Climbing Mechanism Ideas
MetalJacket
06-01-2013, 11:55
There's already a thread for shooter ideas so what are you guys thinking in terms of climbing?
Robby Unruh
06-01-2013, 12:03
My team has been prototyping something along the lines of a "bike peddler" design.
One of my teams ideas was to have a conveyor belt like mechanizm with claws to grasp the bars
scott1363
06-01-2013, 12:15
I have the question regarding the rules and the animation.
During the animation, they show a robot scooting under the bars, being at level 0 - the ground, grabbing the second level then lift up and touching the first level.
This either violates the rule about skipping a level or if there is some sort of contact with level one prior to touching level 3, it violates touching more than 2 levels at a time.
Am I wrong?
Thanks.
MetalJacket
06-01-2013, 12:17
The game animations do not always agree with the rules. Although, I do believe that robot jumped up onto the first level before hooking onto the second.
I have the question regarding the rules and the animation.
During the animation, they show a robot scooting under the bars, being at level 0 - the ground, grabbing the second level then lift up and touching the first level.
This either violates the rule about skipping a level or if there is some sort of contact with level one prior to touching level 3, it violates touching more than 2 levels at a time.
Am I wrong?
Thanks.
Unfortunately yes. If you look closely you can see the robot perches itself on level one, and THEN uses hooks itself to level two.
TVwazhere
06-01-2013, 12:51
Yeah. In the animation, it bounces before grabbing the second bar.... hence leaving level 0, being suspended momentarily on level one before grabbing level 2. I had that question originally but looking back on it it just barely avoids the penalty
What about some kind of arm to place a hook and then just use a winch to pull your robot up. Then some kind of secondary mechinism to hold the robot in place. Not sure how to get to the second and third levels, maybe springs to reset the arm if you disengage the ratchet
davidthefat
06-01-2013, 13:12
Yeah. In the animation, it bounces before grabbing the second bar.... hence leaving level 0, being suspended momentarily on level one before grabbing level 2. I had that question originally but looking back on it it just barely avoids the penalty
But the rule states that a legal climb is when the robot contacts the pyramid sequentially. The pyramid does not include the airspace, or you will never have a "legal climb". If the air space was considered part of the pyramid in that level, to get to suspended in the 1st level, your hook would intrude into the 2nd level air space. That would mean that it was not a legal climb because you are in 3 levels at one time (0, 1, 2). But that is the wrong interpretation. Airspace is not part of the pyramid of the corresponding level; but it is still part of the "level" when counting points. The pyramid is only the steel structure.
A ROBOT has CLIMBED its PYRAMID if it contacts the PYRAMID in
sequential order (Level 0, 1, 2, 3) during ascent and
no more than two (2) Levels simultaneously.
If a CLIMB is considered unacceptable (e.g. a ROBOT has touched non-adjacent Levels or more than two (2) Levels at a time), a Referee will indicate a rejected CLIMB by turning the offending ROBOT’S PLAYER STATION LED strings yellow. The ROBOT will be ineligible for CLIMB points unless and until it begins a new CLIMB from the floor, Level 0.
Sean Raia
06-01-2013, 13:24
What about some kind of arm to place a hook and then just use a winch to pull your robot up. Then some kind of secondary mechinism to hold the robot in place. Not sure how to get to the second and third levels, maybe springs to reset the arm if you disengage the ratchet
See 2010 "Breakaway".
TVwazhere
06-01-2013, 13:59
But the rule states that a legal climb is when the robot contacts the pyramid sequentially. The pyramid does not include the airspace, or you will never have a "legal climb". If the air space was considered part of the pyramid in that level, to get to suspended in the 1st level, your hook would intrude into the 2nd level air space. That would mean that it was not a legal climb because you are in 3 levels at one time (0, 1, 2). But that is the wrong interpretation. Airspace is not part of the pyramid of the corresponding level; but it is still part of the "level" when counting points. The pyramid is only the steel structure.
That makes sense, Otherwise any robot thats over 60" tall near the pyramid would be in violation of that rule.... They really should clarify slightly more.
We've come up with a few designs already. One has a groove going through the whole underside of the robot and a pair of treads/belts/whatever on each side of the groove. There would be at least two sets of two grabbers/hooks/grappling devices, preferably parallel to one another at two different points along the belts. We would drive up to the corner of the pyramid, push the robot up the corner pole until the lifter can engage, and turn it on, hoisting the robot up off the ground and up the poles.
Another thought was to have (essentially) two of these, one at the front and one at the back of the robot: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y94Yhm1dhv0 Obviously it would be highly modified and adapted with better wheels and so on, but the idea would be that the first one would pull the robot up to the bottom of a level, then kind of disengage and retract, letting the second one push the robot up enough for the first to re-engage, which would let both be used to pull the robot up.
those two were based on climbing up the corners. We had one idea that would be based on climbing the horizontals. Basically, that one had three arms. One would grab the horizontal and pull the front of the robot up. Then the other two arms would grab onto that bar for stability while the third pulled the robot up to the next level and so on.
Hope that was of some help.
falconmaster
06-01-2013, 14:35
We've come up with a few designs already. One has a groove going through the whole underside of the robot and a pair of treads/belts/whatever on each side of the groove. There would be at least two sets of two grabbers/hooks/grappling devices, preferably parallel to one another at two different points along the belts. We would drive up to the corner of the pyramid, push the robot up the corner pole until the lifter can engage, and turn it on, hoisting the robot up off the ground and up the poles.
Another thought was to have (essentially) two of these, one at the front and one at the back of the robot: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y94Yhm1dhv0 Obviously it would be highly modified and adapted with better wheels and so on, but the idea would be that the first one would pull the robot up to the bottom of a level, then kind of disengage and retract, letting the second one push the robot up enough for the first to re-engage, which would let both be used to pull the robot up.
those two were based on climbing up the corners. We had one idea that would be based on climbing the horizontals. Basically, that one had three arms. One would grab the horizontal and pull the front of the robot up. Then the other two arms would grab onto that bar for stability while the third pulled the robot up to the next level and so on.
Hope that was of some help.
I like your idea ,how would you keep the 120lb robot from rotating around the pole?
ttldomination
06-01-2013, 14:38
We've come up with a few designs already. One has a groove going through the whole underside of the robot and a pair of treads/belts/whatever on each side of the groove. There would be at least two sets of two grabbers/hooks/grappling devices, preferably parallel to one another at two different points along the belts. We would drive up to the corner of the pyramid, push the robot up the corner pole until the lifter can engage, and turn it on, hoisting the robot up off the ground and up the poles.
Another thought was to have (essentially) two of these, one at the front and one at the back of the robot: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y94Yhm1dhv0 Obviously it would be highly modified and adapted with better wheels and so on, but the idea would be that the first one would pull the robot up to the bottom of a level, then kind of disengage and retract, letting the second one push the robot up enough for the first to re-engage, which would let both be used to pull the robot up.
those two were based on climbing up the corners. We had one idea that would be based on climbing the horizontals. Basically, that one had three arms. One would grab the horizontal and pull the front of the robot up. Then the other two arms would grab onto that bar for stability while the third pulled the robot up to the next level and so on.
Hope that was of some help.
When climbing the corners, how would you get over the tubing that's wrapped around the corners? You can't straight up.
- Sunny G.
falconmaster
06-01-2013, 14:40
Funny when I type robot climbing monkey bars in You Tube, I get nothing....
I did find this though when I typed robot climbing pole
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HEn-fWKcqc
davidthefat
06-01-2013, 14:45
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=CpvE4fySkGA#t=67s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtP0BspnSjY
May be a similar principle might work. But that's just throwing any legality out the window.
AhAhPatel
06-01-2013, 14:47
quick question, has anyone considered the pros and cons of climbing either inside or outside the pyramids? I mean obviously the size limits would come into effect if you were to climb inside, but there are more possibilities I think of getting up. Obviously this size limit wouldn't apply if you climb outside, but there are several problems, like the extra tubing at 30, 60 and 90 inches. I know in our team, we have debated this greatly, and still are split. anything you can add to this debate would be much appreciated. :)
AhAhPatel
06-01-2013, 15:00
what do you mean by bike peddler design?
Sean Raia
06-01-2013, 15:04
What if you climbed the edge and used the notches to your advantage?
You'd have to make sure there's a wide enough channel on the underside of your robot so that your components didn't get snagged on the notch, but I think it's feasible.
As for the climbing mechanism... two hooked pneumatic arms that can be rotated down onto the bars on either side of the corner of the pyramid may work.
These hooks could work in such a way that they would slide smoothly against the bars on the pyramid until they catch and hold the robot in place.
(you'd also want a really tight wheelbase)
http://www.allredlodge.com/images/content/3656_3767_Red_Lodge_Montana_Ice_Climbing_md.jpg
I like your idea ,how would you keep the 120lb robot from rotating around the pole?
We haven't quite gotten to that point yet (I assume you're talking about the horizontal climber), though I think the plan would be to work out the dimensions of the robot/arms such that either the robot would be supported (for a short second at least) by resting on the lower horizontal OR held very tightly in position (or at least a position where the balancing was manageable) until the third arm grabbed it. We had the same concerns and in part I was throwing it out here because I want to see if anyone else has ideas on how to fix that problem.
When climbing the corners, how would you get over the tubing that's wrapped around the corners? You can't straight up.
- Sunny G.
We would be using the corners to grab onto, and in the first design at least we would be making our "groove" through the bottom such that the robot, riding on the belts that would be moving the grabbing piece(s), just slid right over the corners. Most likely upon further refinement we will add some kind of stabilizing mechanism there to be safe.
quick question, has anyone considered the pros and cons of climbing either inside or outside the pyramids? I mean obviously the size limits would come into effect if you were to climb inside, but there are more possibilities I think of getting up. Obviously this size limit wouldn't apply if you climb outside, but there are several problems, like the extra tubing at 30, 60 and 90 inches. I know in our team, we have debated this greatly, and still are split. anything you can add to this debate would be much appreciated. :)
My team briefly considered climbing up the inside. We chose against it first because the angle is hellacious to begin with, and getting into an inside climbing position would be very difficult. At the same time, it's an even bigger safety hazard for the robot if we climb up the inside. If ANYTHING fails from the inside, we have to assume that in the worst case scenario the robot falls off the pyramid and lands upside down, which would most likely destroy everything above the frame. The damage could be minimized, sure, but we decided that ultimately the risk was too much.
AhAhPatel
06-01-2013, 15:25
We haven't quite gotten to that point yet (I assume you're talking about the horizontal climber), though I think the plan would be to work out the dimensions of the robot/arms such that either the robot would be supported (for a short second at least) by resting on the lower horizontal OR held very tightly in position (or at least a position where the balancing was manageable) until the third arm grabbed it. We had the same concerns and in part I was throwing it out here because I want to see if anyone else has ideas on how to fix that problem.
We would be using the corners to grab onto, and in the first design at least we would be making our "groove" through the bottom such that the robot, riding on the belts that would be moving the grabbing piece(s), just slid right over the corners. Most likely upon further refinement we will add some kind of stabilizing mechanism there to be safe.
My team briefly considered climbing up the inside. We chose against it first because the angle is hellacious to begin with, and getting into an inside climbing position would be very difficult. At the same time, it's an even bigger safety hazard for the robot if we climb up the inside. If ANYTHING fails from the inside, we have to assume that in the worst case scenario the robot falls off the pyramid and lands upside down, which would most likely destroy everything above the frame. The damage could be minimized, sure, but we decided that ultimately the risk was too much.
I see what you are saying, but your vision and our team's vision was different. I believe what you are thinking of is like a monkey climbing up on the inside, which yes, i agree would be rather dangerous. (correct me if i am wrong). however, our team was thinking of having some sort of pnumatic driven arm which would extend up and out at the second level and pull our robot up. that way if we could pull that off, the robot would still be in driving position, and if it did fall, it would (hopefully) fall straight back on the tires. I mean, regardless of how we go about climbing this pyramid, it is going to be risky business...
I see what you are saying, but your vision and our team's vision was different. I believe what you are thinking of is like a monkey climbing up on the inside, which yes, i agree would be rather dangerous. (correct me if i am wrong). however, our team was thinking of having some sort of pnumatic driven arm which would extend up and out at the second level and pull our robot up. that way if we could pull that off, the robot would still be in driving position, and if it did fall, it would (hopefully) fall straight back on the tires. I mean, regardless of how we go about climbing this pyramid, it is going to be risky business...
I may be misreading what you write, but there are a couple of issues that I see. One, climbing has to be sequential and you can only touch two consecutive/contiguous levels at the same time. So you can touch 0 and 1, 1 and 2, 2 and 3, but not 0 and 2, which is (in my reading) what your team seems to be saying. Correct me if I'm wrong, absolutely, but yeah, it appears that you would be violating the rules by going directly to the second level.
A ROBOT has CLIMBED its PYRAMID if it contacts the PYRAMID in
A. sequential order (Level 0, 1, 2, 3) during ascent and B. no more than two (2) Levels simultaneously.
If a CLIMB is considered unacceptable (e.g. a ROBOT has touched non-adjacent Levels or more than two (2) Levels at a time), a Referee will indicate a rejected CLIMB by turning the offending ROBOT’S PLAYER STATION LED strings yellow. The ROBOT will be ineligible for CLIMB points unless and until it begins a new CLIMB from the floor, Level 0.
Additionally, it appears as though any sort of mechanism that would reach out and grab onto the pyramid levels from the inside to lift the robot up would occupy a more than 54" diameter circle. If the rules allowed the robot to touch any level in any order, that strategy might work, but 3.2.5.2 G23 A ROBOT’S horizontal dimensions may never exceed a 54 in. diameter vertical cylinder.
Please, be sure to correct me if I have misunderstood anything you have said.
Orion.DeYoe
06-01-2013, 18:40
Based on the rules and some common sense (the GDC didn't seem to have any at the time they wrote the rules) I have to conclude that the bar (being in contact with the bar) at 30 in. is part of zone 1, the bar at 60 in. is part of zone 2, and the bar at 90 in. is part of zone 3.
The rules weren't very clear on the exact location of the three zones in relation to the three crossbars.
AhAhPatel
06-01-2013, 18:41
Nope. you are completely right. I had misread the rules to say that a climb is considered invalid if you touch more than 2 at a time that aren't adjacent. (basically you could go from 0 to 2 as long as you don't touch 1). thank you for the clarification! Also, i see your point for horizontal, but i just thought about the vertical aspect, that is if we are touching the pyramid, we can extend vertically to 84". I guess we will have to rethink our approach. however, i thank you for your help!
DjMaddius
06-01-2013, 18:42
Based on the rules and some common sense (the GDC didn't seem to have any at the time they wrote the rules) I have to conclude that the bar (being in contact with the bar) at 30 in. is part of zone 1, the bar at 60 in. is part of zone 2, and the bar at 90 in. is part of zone 3.
The rules weren't very clear on the exact location of the three zones in relation to the three crossbars.
Look at the picture in the rule book. The lines are ABOVE the bars for the location of zones. Make sure you are ABOVE the bar to get the points, not on it.
Nope. you are completely right. I had misread the rules to say that a climb is considered invalid if you touch more than 2 at a time that aren't adjacent. (basically you could go from 0 to 2 as long as you don't touch 1). thank you for the clarification! Also, i see your point for horizontal, but i just thought about the vertical aspect, that is if we are touching the pyramid, we can extend vertically to 84". I guess we will have to rethink our approach. however, i thank you for your help!
Any time! I was thinking about how a robot that climbed in driving position like what you were saying would look and I think it would be visually awesome...GDC why must thou make it hard on us?
tickspe15
06-01-2013, 19:11
Is there any rule against using electromagnets to grip the pyramid.
Given how many people it seems are going to be focused on climbing this year, have any of you considered that you might have to deal with two other robots climbing the pyramid at the same time as you? Sending one robot seven and a half feet above the ground is a scary enough concept on its own, but when you put two more in the mix, it seems to become extremely risky and complicated. Can you say "three robot pile-up"?
Personally, I think the way to go for climbing strategy is to focus on having a strong disc scoring mechanism and shoot 3-pointers for the whole match, and then near the end, grab the pyramid near the bottom and just lift yourself a few inches off the ground for a cool 10 points.
CJ The Expert
06-01-2013, 19:14
The idea we have been working on would be simple arms to grab onto the first set of bars and just lift our robot off of the ground. This means we can get an easy 10 points (unless our interpretation of the rules is skewed), keep the robot safe from large drops, and allow us more time on shooting and/or defending.
Basically, we're going for a simple climb for a few extra points so that we can spend less time on the problem of how to get high safely, and more on other aspects of the robot that may be useful.
AhAhPatel
06-01-2013, 19:17
Based on the rules and some common sense (the GDC didn't seem to have any at the time they wrote the rules) I have to conclude that the bar (being in contact with the bar) at 30 in. is part of zone 1, the bar at 60 in. is part of zone 2, and the bar at 90 in. is part of zone 3.
The rules weren't very clear on the exact location of the three zones in relation to the three crossbars.
It seems from my understanding that the hanging points are given based on where the bottom of your robot is. so: if you hang from the 30" bar and your robot is .5" above the floor (level 0), then you get 10 points. so, if you hang from the second bar, as long as your robot is over the first bar, you are counted in the 20 point zone. basically I think it goes like this: 1st bar to above the floor: 1st zone or 10 points. 2nd bar to above the 1st bar is the 20 point zone. and 3rd bar to above the second bar is the 30 point zone. hope that made sense
Is there any rule against using electromagnets to grip the pyramid.
No rules about magnets.
Seeing as the robot is unpowered when it's taken down, electromagnets would make the robot fall off. Not to mention that electromagnets strong enough to hold (much less pull) a robot to the pyramid would suck tons of power.
DjMaddius
06-01-2013, 19:21
Given how many people it seems are going to be focused on climbing this year, have any of you considered that you might have to deal with two other robots climbing the pyramid at the same time as you? Sending one robot seven and a half feet above the ground is a scary enough concept on its own, but when you put two more in the mix, it seems to become extremely risky and complicated. Can you say "three robot pile-up"?
Personally, I think the way to go for climbing strategy is to focus on having a strong disc scoring mechanism and shoot 3-pointers for the whole match, and then near the end, grab the pyramid near the bottom and just lift yourself a few inches off the ground for a cool 10 points. There are 4 corners to the pyramid, plenty of space to fit all 3 of us on it! ;)
ablahblah
06-01-2013, 19:42
Do you have to be in contact with the pyramid at ALL times? I'm confused about the rule just saying that it has to contact all levels in order.
MetalJacket
06-01-2013, 19:47
There's nothing that states you must maintain contact, just that for a climb to count, you must touch the pyramid in each zone leading up to your highest in sequential order without touching more than two at once. If you want to build a robot that flies to the top and just touches each rung on the way up, that should be totaly legal.
gabrielau23
06-01-2013, 19:47
6 robots racing for 4 sides of the pyramid will be pretty cool at the end, especially in elimination matches. Do you leave your best shooter (but best climber) on the field to continue to score frisbees? Or do you have your two best climbers go for the pyramid yet have your "worst" bot continue shooting? sigh................
I asked about 3 engineers today, and they all said what we're doing right now in 6 weeks is pretty hard...and VERY challenging.
6 robots racing for 4 sides of the pyramid will be pretty cool at the end, especially in elimination matches. Do you leave your best shooter (but best climber) on the field to continue to score frisbees? Or do you have your two best climbers go for the pyramid yet have your "worst" bot continue shooting? sigh................
I asked about 3 engineers today, and they all said what we're doing right now in 6 weeks is pretty hard...and VERY challenging.
6 robots would race for 8 sides worth of pyramid, not 4.
gabrielau23
06-01-2013, 19:58
6 robots would race for 8 sides worth of pyramid, not 4.
8 sides? You mean that robots will also be climbing from the inside of the pyramid? Pardonez-moi, mais je sais (Pardon me, but I think) that it would be far too risky for teams to attempt to climb the same rungs simultaneously.
MetalJacket
06-01-2013, 20:00
He was referring to the fact that each alliance has its own 4-sided pyramid ... 2*4 sides = 8 total sides
gabrielau23
06-01-2013, 20:09
He was referring to the fact that each alliance has its own 4-sided pyramid ... 2*4 sides = 8 total sides
Ahhh my b.....lol I brainfarted and locked on to just our alliance's pyramid....didn't account for the other pyramid.
MetalJacket
06-01-2013, 20:13
That's fine, I've had several "duh"-moments when it comes to forgetting simple stuff like that so far.
How's the brainstorming coming along? The complexity of this task is proving to be a stumper so far, it seems. I wonder if we'll see any dedicated climbers with no other abilities. Is there any precedent in FIRST for non-wheeled bots?
How's the brainstorming coming along? The complexity of this task is proving to be a stumper so far, it seems. I wonder if we'll see any dedicated climbers with no other abilities. Is there any precedent in FIRST for non-wheeled bots?
There was one robot several years ago that had a walking/crawling mechanism for defense.
gabrielau23
06-01-2013, 20:28
How's the brainstorming coming along? The complexity of this task is proving to be a stumper so far, it seems. I wonder if we'll see any dedicated climbers with no other abilities. Is there any precedent in FIRST for non-wheeled bots?
Haha I don't think we'll see any like that. The maximum score for the robots if you scored every single frisbee on the field was 400+. If your alliance scored 200 points, you would only have scored 15% of the total score. I know alliances are rarely that balanced when it comes to scoring, but let's say you "only" score 100 points you still don't make up 1/3 of the alliance points.
How's the brainstorming coming along? The complexity of this task is proving to be a stumper so far, it seems. I wonder if we'll see any dedicated climbers with no other abilities. Is there any precedent in FIRST for non-wheeled bots?
One of our mentors came up with a non-wheeled design. a 50 pound, 16x16x16 cube that would do nothing except climb to the third level. Really, you wouldn't even need drivers. Someone could take that idea of a non-wheeled robot and ask really nicely for other robots to give them the alliance colored frisbees and have a really simple dumping mechanism to get another 20 points.
MetalJacket
06-01-2013, 20:29
One idea, assuming you can work with the size constraints involved, is to drive under the pyramid and using a bot that has some kind of tower tilted to the angle of the side rails, latch on to the side rail using three actuated hooks and have powered wheels on the inside of the rail to ride up. As you reached the part where the rungs mee the rail, you could just actuate on hook at a time to get over it. ... Maybe?
gabrielau23
06-01-2013, 20:30
One of our mentors came up with a non-wheeled design. a 50 pound, 16x16x16 cube that would do nothing except climb to the third level. Really, you wouldn't even need drivers. Someone could take that idea of a non-wheeled robot and ask really nicely for other robots to give them the alliance colored frisbees and have a really simple dumping mechanism to get another 20 points.
That's true though. However, you'd better wait until after autonomous to do that. Just let your drivers press a button. Ta-da! But your robot is not pre-loaded with colored discs, so you'd have to find a way to put the colored discs inside your robot.
That's true though. However, you'd better wait until after autonomous to do that. Just let your drivers press a button. Ta-da! But your robot is not pre-loaded with colored discs, so you'd have to find a way to put the colored discs inside your robot.
The entire driver's station could just be a huge button, and both drivers could make a show of slamming it in the most epic fashion imaginable. I would select them for an alliance partner if I were a high enough seed.
pmangels17
06-01-2013, 20:39
We were considering having an inchworm type climber on the corner pole, with a rack and pinion on a worm drive, with something to kick your robot out and over the knuckles. However, the issue is that you cannot contact anywhere in zone two until you are off the floor, which is zone zero, since you can only contact two zones at a time.
IN regards to the controls, we could have two BIG red buttons (out of arms reach from each other, and with flip covers to prevent accidental activation) with glowing lights, and when the robot begins its climb (which we will automate for the purpose of time, this is an actual plan, since manual operation of the climber will be difficult), we could have a light show on the robot, just for fun.
IN regards to the controls, we could have two BIG red buttons (out of arms reach from each other, and with flip covers to prevent accidental activation) with glowing lights, and when the robot begins its climb (which we will automate for the purpose of time, this is an actual plan, since manual operation of the climber will be difficult), we could have a light show on the robot, just for fun.
Better yet, have your drive team press those buttons and (providing the robot shimmies up the pole at a predictable rate) then drop to the floor and stand up with the robot.
"Haha I don't think we'll see any like that. The maximum score for the robots if you scored every single frisbee on the field was 400+. If your alliance scored 200 points, you would only have scored 15% of the total score. I know alliances are rarely that balanced when it comes to scoring, but let's say you "only" score 100 points you still don't make up 1/3 of the alliance points."
I wouldn't be shocked to see awesome scores like 200+ in the championship, and in some of the powerhouse regionals, but in run-of-the-mill seeding rounds at your average regional, a reliable 30 just might win matches.
pmangels17
06-01-2013, 20:47
"Haha I don't think we'll see any like that. The maximum score for the robots if you scored every single frisbee on the field was 400+. If your alliance scored 200 points, you would only have scored 15% of the total score. I know alliances are rarely that balanced when it comes to scoring, but let's say you "only" score 100 points you still don't make up 1/3 of the alliance points."
I wouldn't be shocked to see awesome scores like 200+ in the championship, and in some of the powerhouse regionals, but in run-of-the-mill seeding rounds at your average regional, a reliable 30 just might win matches.
Yes, but before we get sidetracked, this thread is, not to be rude, to discuss climbing ideas.
In Overdrive, 2008, Denver, one of the top three teams was a minibot that did nothing but drive in a circle, fast, and avoid the traffic.
MetalJacket
06-01-2013, 20:48
In Overdrive, 2008, Denver, one of the top three teams was a minibot that did nothing but drive in a circle, fast, and avoid the traffic.
One of the robots that won championships did just that. Is that an analogy to focusing on climbing alone?
I certainly am interested in climbing ideas. Part of my thinking is that, by making a dedicated climber, you would eliminate the weight and awkward size and shape of a wheeled base, allowing more design freedom.
Chris Fultz
06-01-2013, 20:51
Is there any rule against using electromagnets to grip the pyramid.
I believe the pyramid is aluminum.
MetalJacket
06-01-2013, 20:52
Nope, powder coated steel
PYRAMID: The Red or Blue steel structure on which ROBOTS CLIMB for points
$wimmer3138
06-01-2013, 20:59
Nope, powder coated steel
Do you or any one else know what kind of powder coat it is? I have heard that depending on how it's done the powder coat could make the steel either slick or gritty.
I personally don't agree with having a climbing only robot. It seems that in order to be a top 8 team or be picked by one, a versatile robot is necessary. Now back to climbing ideas: What if your robot is triangular and between 30" and 60" tall. What one could do is plant robot near the pyramid, use pistons to push it back so that the robot lays on the "side" of the pyramid, and then a conveyor belt with hooks on it can pull the robot up the diagonal side of the pyramid without touching the corners and still being legal. I hope whatever I just said makes sense.
gabrielau23
06-01-2013, 21:09
I think somebody told me there was a small robot like that in Breakaway as well. Just zip around and block goals. However, Breakaway was a lot more low scoring and I anticipate that this game will be much more high scoring. Especially since we get to play teams like Jester, Vulcan, and Robobees. I don't know if MOE and Miss Daisy will be doing Chesapeake or DC this year, but I know they used to do them. If so........
pmangels17
06-01-2013, 21:12
Anyway, we also came up with the idea of approaching the diagonal from the inside, clamping around, and driving up with wheels, similar to the big, slow, Tetrix minibots.
MetalJacket
06-01-2013, 21:13
Did you think of a better way to get around the joints than the 3 actuated hooks we thought up?
Responding to dheerm here. Maybe I am missing something with this climber idea. But when you start the climb and leave the ground you cannot be touching that second horizontal rung. So doesn't your robot just swing outwards and become vertical again? We've been toying with ideas along this line for two days and cannot see how to reliably keep the bot from kicking back out vertical once you leave the ground (and therefore touch the ground again - which prevents you from grabbing that second rung).
pmangels17
06-01-2013, 21:19
with the inchworm idea, you have two separate but identical grabbers at the bottom of the robot, that the robot can sit back on and hang while the puling arm repositions itself. when the upper grabber hits the knuckle, it retracts, and the robot rests on the lower grabber. Then, when the lower grabber hits the knuckle, the upper one comes back, and the lower one retracts. We also "sit" on these, similar to the way the sliding, pump handle clamps prevent from opening, while the raising arm repositions itself.
Did you think of a better way to get around the joints than the 3 actuated hooks we thought up?
I'm thinking that a groove down the center of the robot with a belt on each side with floating sprockets at the front and back will be a good way of keeping the robot close to the pole. I've detailed elsewhere in this thread more of what would be on each belt, but a floating sprocket could be considerably helpful.
pmangels17
06-01-2013, 21:21
Either style works. The best way to climb the outside is probably on the corners. However, you must prevent yourself from spinning around on the pole.
What about using the rungs? A robot with two extendable arms and hooks, each on a rotating "shoulder" joint? Think monkey bars.
pmangels17
06-01-2013, 21:29
We were thinking skis on the sides of the corner climber, that ride on the horizontals.
MetalJacket
06-01-2013, 21:36
We were thinking skis on the sides of the corner climber, that ride on the horizontals.
How would you hold the robot on as it's climbing?
ratdude747
06-01-2013, 21:38
Here's an idea I happened to think of:
Use two vertical and sliding rails, the could be pivoted out at the same angle as the pyramid (either 68 degrees or 60 degrees). The ends of the rails would have a hook that was spring loaded and could collapse inward when pushed from the top, but hold rigid when pushed from below. Similar to rung lock mechanism on an extension ladder:
http://0.tqn.com/d/ergonomics/1/0/n/3/-/-/photo10.JPG
To start, one would drive to the pyramid, swing out the rails, and raise one rail so the hook would ratchet into the rail when it hit the rung, slide past, pop out, and grasp the rung. Then that rail would be retracted back, lifting the robot base. This process would be repeated for the second rail to reach the second rung, and then again with the first rail to reach the third rung.
A ratchet/anti-backdrive system would be in the drive for the rails, to reduce load on the motors and to keep the robot up when the match was over.
Just a thought I had. I haven't been on a robot design committee for a couple years but my mind still is in the "habit".
pmangels17
06-01-2013, 21:40
You could use a ratchet system, or you could use a worm drive, which could be reversed if need be. That is what out design requires. Or helical gears.
One of our mentors came up with a non-wheeled design. a 50 pound, 16x16x16 cube that would do nothing except climb to the third level. Really, you wouldn't even need drivers. Someone could take that idea of a non-wheeled robot and ask really nicely for other robots to give them the alliance colored frisbees and have a really simple dumping mechanism to get another 20 points.
Did he have a plan for attaching bumpers to it? I mean one that doesn't interfere with the climbing. Maybe once climbing has begun, the bumpers could be dangled from a cord.
Did he have a plan for attaching bumpers to it? I mean one that doesn't interfere with the climbing. Maybe once climbing has begun, the bumpers could be dangled from a cord.
To limit post size I won't go into all of the details again, but early on (like page one or two of this thread) I described it a little better and linked to a Youtube video that shows his inspiration. Essentially though he did not need to worry because all of the climbing mechanism was underneath the robot and the bumpers could be mounted above it.
Is there any rule against using electromagnets to grip the pyramid.
No, but I'd be concerned about
Whether or not the battery has enough juice to sustain such a powerful enough magnet
What such a powerful magnet would do to the electronics
Whether inspectors would consider such a device to be safe
Not to mention that all outputs are disabled when the match ends and I think such a device is required to be controlled by the cRIO.
... Is there any precedent in FIRST for non-wheeled bots?
Our team did tank treads for Breakaway (2010). Powerful, couldn't be pushed, and always went over the bumps. But not very fast.
Responding to dheerm here. Maybe I am missing something with this climber idea. But when you start the climb and leave the ground you cannot be touching that second horizontal rung. So doesn't your robot just swing outwards and become vertical again? We've been toying with ideas along this line for two days and cannot see how to reliably keep the bot from kicking back out vertical once you leave the ground (and therefore touch the ground again - which prevents you from grabbing that second rung).
I didn't think of that. Even if we used a top heavy robot, it would just keep spinning till it fell. Unless maybe this robot was designed so perfectly that the conveyor belt with hooks on it immediately grabbed the second rung the moment the robot was lifted off the ground then maybe it could work.
pfreivald
06-01-2013, 22:51
Our team did tank treads for Breakaway (2010). Powerful, couldn't be pushed, and always went over the bumps. But not very fast.
Treads aren't something I'd advise unless you've prototyped in the off-season.
I can only think of two approaches that will work and meet the requirements of the rules (or at least their spirit, as I read them; QA will need to clarify some things on the 9th). Approach #1: a caterpillar, either outside or inside the corner. Approach #2: a human/ape approach, with at least two grasping and releasing appendages. You can't balance on two rungs, as you won't be able to touch three zones at a time.
brycen66
06-01-2013, 23:08
Not to mention that all outputs are disabled when the match ends and I think such a device is required to be controlled by the cRIO.
Would it be against the rules to use a spike relay, a NOT gate, and an additional relay on your electromagnet? I'm not saying that an electromagnet would be feasible, I'm just saying that your robot (if designed well) would not fall at the end of a match.
neaanopri
06-01-2013, 23:44
I thought of a third approach.
If you had a hooked conveyor belt on a pivot in the body, which was on rails, you could lift yourself from the ground, tilt the pivot to grasp the second rung, then elevate yourself above the first rung and hang from the second. Repeat to hang from the third rung.
Here's a picture: http://imgur.com/w37qr
It would then repeat this to get up to the third ring.
Pros:- Doesn't take as many motors
- Robot does not have to be specifically designed to lift.
Cons:-Takes a long time
-Requires a functioning hooked conveyor that can lift the whole robot
jason701802
07-01-2013, 00:32
Is there any rule against using electromagnets to grip the pyramid.
Yes, by R32, electric solenoids may not exceed 10 watts. The rule refers to "electrical solenoid actuators", but R52 simply refers to "electric solenoids". Also, in previous years electromagnets have been lumped in with motors/electric actuators and I do not see that changing this year.
nathan_hui
07-01-2013, 01:24
Yes, that would be illegal. You cannot have custom components between the MC and the motor/electrical actuators. The only thing that you could possibly put there is a cap as a filter. Also, the second relay would need power, which restricts the relay to be a spike. Additionally, the magnet probably would fail R32.
DampRobot
07-01-2013, 01:35
Any teams had any luck prototyping "minibot climber" types? I'm talking about something that rides up the diagonals of the pyramids on wheels, hanging on somehow.
Joon Park
07-01-2013, 02:37
Treads aren't something I'd advise unless you've prototyped in the off-season.
We've actually done tank treads for the past four years that we've gotten better at treads than wheels.
Adam.garcia
07-01-2013, 03:38
Any teams had any luck prototyping "minibot climber" types? I'm talking about something that rides up the diagonals of the pyramids on wheels, hanging on somehow.
For this, I've been thinking of having an articulated 1717 2010-esque lifter that will be able to traverse the corners. Have a latching system on the top, and drive wheels at the bottom. By any chance, does anybody have close up pics of their latching mechanism from that year?
I see that they posted pics of their bot here: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/35361
But the only pic that is broken is the one for the latching.
Paul Copioli
07-01-2013, 05:59
One of our mentors came up with a non-wheeled design. a 50 pound, 16x16x16 cube that would do nothing except climb to the third level. Really, you wouldn't even need drivers. Someone could take that idea of a non-wheeled robot and ask really nicely for other robots to give them the alliance colored frisbees and have a really simple dumping mechanism to get another 20 points.
We would definitely pick this robot in the first round if it could get 30 points every match. If it could score in auton, that it is a no brainier.
At the risk of looking like an idiot like last year (thanks HOT), the 30 point hang will be able to be accomplished by less than 20 teams in all of FRC.
So if your robot can get 30 points from the hang, they are a keeper for a great partner to frisbee shooting robots.
Justin Montois
07-01-2013, 06:22
We would definitely pick this robot in the first round if it could get 30 points every match. If it could score in auton, that it is a no brainier.
At the risk of looking like an idiot like last year (thanks HOT), the 30 point hang will be able to be accomplished by less than 20 teams in all of FRC.
So if your robot can get 30 points from the hang, they are a keeper for a great partner to frisbee shooting robots.
If they can do that and a little more they might be picking you ;)
cmrnpizzo14
07-01-2013, 07:39
Our team did tank treads for Breakaway (2010). Powerful, couldn't be pushed, and always went over the bumps. But not very fast.
It was great for bending omniwheels too, let's not forget that
;)
Robo Hamsters
07-01-2013, 08:25
Here is an interesting idea: http://youtu.be/zkpH1BjD6Wc
A little more towards the insane side of the spectrum...
I did a quick calculation comparing kinetic and potential energy. The numbers actually make this feasible.
Remember “Back to the Future”? If you put a 30 inch vertical hook on the back of your robot, and drove at full speed under the tower, the hook would catch on the lowest bar, and the robot would flip up high enough for you to catch the second bar. Then you release the lower bar hook and score 20 points. Unless the tower or the robot comes apart at impact…
You need a very fast robot and the starting height of the robot CG should be as high as possible. We think it would be ruled "unsafe" for competition, but it would be fun to prototype...
Remember “Back to the Future”? If you put a 30 inch vertical hook on the back of your robot, and drove at full speed under the tower, the hook would catch on the lowest bar, and the robot would flip up high enough for you to catch the second bar. Then you release the lower bar hook and score 20 points. Unless the tower or the robot comes apart at impact…
That has come up, and It would be amazing to see. But I feel the "floor protector" would keep from that design from successfully working. Although I think you already came to that conclusion :)
If they can do that and a little more they might be picking you ;)
One does not simply pick 217. :cool:
J.Warsoff
07-01-2013, 10:03
Take a look at our Breakaway robot, Weeble. Rather simple mechanism, grappling hook and winch.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/team1676/5199271926/
pfreivald
07-01-2013, 10:17
One does not simply pick 217. :cool:
We did in 2010... :D
Rishabhgadi
07-01-2013, 11:33
Any teams had any luck prototyping "minibot climber" types? I'm talking about something that rides up the diagonals of the pyramids on wheels, hanging on somehow.
That was my initial idea, but you would not reach past the first level because of the notches on the side which stick out about an inch.
pfreivald
07-01-2013, 11:39
That was my initial idea, but you would not reach past the first level because of the notches on the side which stick out about an inch.
Specifically, the knuckle sticks out quite far on the front, and the gusset extends in the back of the pole, too.
amesmich
07-01-2013, 12:23
I dont think I read anythign pertaining to this but before a climb could a bot disconnect its drive system and essentially leave it behind to reduce weight and size? Obviously the rio, battery, and control would climb but the drive train abandoned? The whole thing woudl be designed as a quick disconnect.
nathan_hui
07-01-2013, 12:24
No
The robot cannot intentionally leave parts behind. G13
amesmich
07-01-2013, 12:46
Dam I missed that. I wasnt just posting for an answer.
Ryan Caldwell
07-01-2013, 12:50
At the risk of looking like an idiot like last year (thanks HOT), the 30 point hang will be able to be accomplished by less than 20 teams in all of FRC.
So if your robot can get 30 points from the hang, they are a keeper for a great partner to frisbee shooting robots.
I like the idea of a "Loch Ness Monster challenge" being thrown down each year.
For this, I've been thinking of having an articulated 1717 2010-esque lifter that will be able to traverse the corners. Have a latching system on the top, and drive wheels at the bottom. By any chance, does anybody have close up pics of their latching mechanism from that year?
I see that they posted pics of their bot here: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/35361
But the only pic that is broken is the one for the latching.
1717 Used a gas spring to lift themselves up. This was an excellent idea because even if they grabbed the tower at the last second, the robot would still go up the tower even after the robot was disabled. That mechanism wouldn't work this year as it reacted against the top surface of the tunnel.
Ok, our team was thinking of an extending hook that would grab the 3rd rung and winch us up as we drove up the side of the pyramid and stopped at possibly the 20 point zone. Would this be against the rule that says we would need to climb up sequentially?
Ok, our team was thinking of an extending hook that would grab the 3rd rung and winch us up as we drove up the side of the pyramid and stopped at possibly the 20 point zone. Would this be against the rule that says we would need to climb up sequentially?Yes. If you grab the 3rd rung while on the floor, you are not climbing sequentially (because the floor is Level 0).
one4robots
07-01-2013, 14:04
Is there any rule against using electromagnets to grip the pyramid.
We used magnets on our minibot for logomotion and have discussed this...
nathan_hui
07-01-2013, 14:16
Electromagnets may violate R32.
DonRotolo
07-01-2013, 14:28
Take a look at our Breakaway robot, Weeble. Rather simple mechanism, grappling hook and winch.Please review <G22>. Also consider what the robot will do once it leaves the ground - can the bot acsend past a bar in that orientation?
hugo3337
07-01-2013, 14:31
I know some have think about pneumatics but then It comes to having a "light" robot.. anyone has thought about something?
washedout
07-01-2013, 14:34
Seeing 3 robots all score the 30 point bonus on one tower will be like seeing the Loch Ness Monster this season.
(Seeing one climb that high in about 4 seconds after the buzzer on the other hand...)
:rolleyes:
There ya go Paul!
J.
Where exactly is the auto zone? My team would like know exactly where on the field your robot can go up to 84 inches?
AndyBare
07-01-2013, 15:40
Your colored carpet and i believe feeding station, not sure about the latter though
MetalJacket
07-01-2013, 15:40
The auto zones are the areas marked out but the long pieces of red and blue tape that cross the fields on the side of the pyramids closest to the center of the field. If you look at the field drawings in the manual, look for the biggest pieces of colored tape. Whenever you are contacting carpet within the zone or are touching the pyramid, you can go to 84".
Look what they did a few years back in FTC. Look familar?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjEtPgTrYPQ
MetalJacket
07-01-2013, 15:59
Yeah, that was VEX round up. The biggest difference between then and now is that in round up, you could latch on to the top and pull yourself all the way up which is, unfortunately, illegal in Ultimate Ascent.
That's true , but only grabbing the second rung with s similar technique would get you 10 points.
falconmaster
07-01-2013, 16:14
Ok it took awhile to find, but here is a climbing robot that could climb our pyramid legally
http://robotzeitgeist.com/tag/climbing-robot
Richard McClellan
07-01-2013, 16:16
Ok it took awhile to find, but here is a climbing robot that could climb our pyramid legally
http://robotzeitgeist.com/tag/climbing-robot
Need idea, but that robot is touching more than 2 levels at a time, if you consider each rung of the ladder a level.
Seeing 3 robots all score the 30 point bonus on one tower will be like seeing the Loch Ness Monster this season.
(Seeing one climb that high in about 4 seconds after the buzzer on the other hand...)
:rolleyes:
There ya go Paul!
J.
Not sure if this is only an allusion to 2010 or if we should all be very, very afraid...
Either way I can't wait to see what you guys come up with in terms of climbing this thing, if you can do it in 4 seconds, that will be a feat of engineering itself, before or after the bell!
MetalJacket
07-01-2013, 16:21
That's one of the most complicated elements of this climb. It cannot be accomplished using a method that is intuitive to how a human would complete the task (aside from jumping up the levels but I don't think most people will feel comfortable with a 100-something lb robot jumping around 5'-8' in the air).
frank.pendzich
07-01-2013, 16:23
Noticeably absent in this year’s competition is the lack of overt scoring opportunities for cooper-tition. I thought this was strange considering FIRST’s ever-present focus on gracious professionalism and collaboration. After three days of mulling over any solution for robo-soloing the tower completely above the first rung, it dawned on me that the design of the tower requires a collaborative approach and that’s why the number of points that can be achieved or so high in comparison to tossing a Frisbee. Team efforts receive more points than those of individuals. Really – They always have.
Although Frisbees are certainly involved in play, they play a minor role in scoring and are probably (forgive me) a red herring. I believe this contest is really a test of team’s abilities to work together to scale that structure. That may be the reason why an individual robot can’t make contact with more than two rungs at a time and can only skip the first rung. It seems that we’re being setup to work together and it’s that feature that may in fact be designed into the game as the desired outcome by the game’s designers.
I think that this must be the rationale behind the game hint we received from the GDC in the form of a still-shot of Rick Ashley music video, “Never Gonna Give You Up.” Here’s the refrain.
Never gonna give you up
Never gonna let you down
Never gonna run around and desert you
The good news… This makes climbing the pyramid much easier if teams work together. Now – How do you capture a Frisbee off the floor.
quick question, has anyone considered the pros and cons of climbing either inside or outside the pyramids? I mean obviously the size limits would come into effect if you were to climb inside, but there are more possibilities I think of getting up. Obviously this size limit wouldn't apply if you climb outside, but there are several problems, like the extra tubing at 30, 60 and 90 inches. I know in our team, we have debated this greatly, and still are split. anything you can add to this debate would be much appreciated. :)
Yes, I've thought about this multiple ways.
My immediate thought after kickoff was to scoot under and send a grappling hook up to level 3, and "ride the elevator up". Until I read the rules, and realized you have to touch each level in order. Then I thought, climbing from the inside might be easier, if you depend on gravity to lean you into the climb. But after wrestling with it a bit, it would seem like it might be easier to climb from the outside, where the pyramid is somewhat underneath you.
Has anyone give thought to building a ramp bot to assist others in climbing? They show one in the video, but I'm very unclear on how that would affect the climbing sequence rule.
The way I read the rules, I would say u r correct
The difficult thing about helping partner robots up the pyramid is that they also have to satisfy the rules for ascending the pyramid in the proper order. They couldn't simply drive up a giant ramp or ride a lift up to the 3rd level, since they would need to contact a point on each level of the pyramid on the way up.
I think an inside climb might be slightly easier because you can grab a bar from beneath and winch or lift up, but I'm concerned about accidentally contacting the ground (level 0) when going from level 1 to level 2. Also you couldn't fit multiple robots inside the pyramid very well (not that we'll see many triple climbs anyway...).
The difficult thing about helping partner robots up the pyramid is that they also have to satisfy the rules for ascending the pyramid in the proper order. They couldn't simply drive up a giant ramp or ride a lift up to the 3rd level, since they would need to contact a point on each level of the pyramid on the way up.
(not that we'll see many triple climbs anyway...).
I think the wedge is a dead end for helping robots climb, myself, but a helper robot could be just a giant box with a flat front and a strong climbing mechanism that would support another robot from behind. Or, and this would be more difficult to implement because it would require more planning, a robot that was incredibly good at climbing and could pull another robot up from behind.
The triple climb could go a number of ways. Three robots on three different corners/planes at the third level means 90 points(!) :yikes: Even three robots on the same plane/corner could be 60 points, which means it's worth considering creating a really strong climber that can bring one or two other robots with it.
jason701802
07-01-2013, 20:18
The difficult thing about helping partner robots up the pyramid is that they also have to satisfy the rules for ascending the pyramid in the proper order. They couldn't simply drive up a giant ramp or ride a lift up to the 3rd level, since they would need to contact a point on each level of the pyramid on the way up.What if you lift them up such that they never touch anything other than level 0?
I'm worried. I see a lot of posts from folks who are misinterpreting the rules, and I'm worried that we'll see a host of unusable robots at the regionals. Yes, there is need for clarification from QA about whether the airspace directly above the tops of each rung constitutes a new zone, but I think the clear intention of the rules is that we find a solution that only allows us to touch (or exist in) two zones at a time. We therefore can't slide up the rungs, or use a hooked conveyor belt, or ski up them. Clearly, it would be much easier if you could balance on two rungs as you reach for a third, but you can't. you will have to freely swing from each rung as you try grasp the next one up.
Not trying to be a party pooper. I really do want to see some cool solutions, but I have been to enough events to have seen the heartbreak of teams who misread the rules, and have to play defense as a fallback, or completely rebuild on game day. :(
SteveGPage
07-01-2013, 21:16
I'm worried. I see a lot of posts from folks who are misinterpreting the rules, and I'm worried that we'll see a host of unusable robots at the regionals. Yes, there is need for clarification from QA about whether the airspace directly above the tops of each rung constitutes a new zone, but I think the clear intention of the rules is that we find a solution that only allows us to touch (or exist in) two zones at a time. We therefore can't slide up the rungs, or use a hooked conveyor belt, or ski up them. Clearly, it would be much easier if you could balance on two rungs as you reach for a third, but you can't. you will have to freely swing from each rung as you try grasp the next one up.
Not trying to be a party pooper. I really do want to see some cool solutions, but I have been to enough events to have seen the heartbreak of teams who misread the rules, and have to play defense as a fallback, or completely rebuild on game day. :(
According to the manual:
A ROBOT has CLIMBED its PYRAMID if it contacts the PYRAMID in
A. sequential order (Level 0, 1, 2, 3) during ascent and
B. no more than two (2) Levels simultaneously.
If a CLIMB is considered unacceptable (e.g. a ROBOT has touched non-adjacent Levels or more than two (2) Levels at a time), a Referee will indicate a rejected CLIMB by turning the offending ROBOT’S PLAYER STATION LED strings yellow. The ROBOT will be ineligible for CLIMB points unless and until it begins a new CLIMB from the floor, Level 0.
... emphasis mine ...
I agree there needs to be clarification from QA, but I see nothing that indicates the "air" in a level is "contacting" or "touching" the pyramid. So I'm not clear how such posts are "misintrepreting" the rules. Please show the rule or part of the manual that suggests your intrepretation.
Thanks!
Steve
I'm worried. I see a lot of posts from folks who are misinterpreting the rules, and I'm worried that we'll see a host of unusable robots at the regionals. Yes, there is need for clarification from QA about whether the airspace directly above the tops of each rung constitutes a new zone, but I think the clear intention of the rules is that we find a solution that only allows us to touch (or exist in) two zones at a time. We therefore can't slide up the rungs, or use a hooked conveyor belt, or ski up them. Clearly, it would be much easier if you could balance on two rungs as you reach for a third, but you can't. you will have to freely swing from each rung as you try grasp the next one up.
Not trying to be a party pooper. I really do want to see some cool solutions, but I have been to enough events to have seen the heartbreak of teams who misread the rules, and have to play defense as a fallback, or completely rebuild on game day. :(Touch and "exist in" are not synonyms. The sequential & simultaneous contact rules are about just that (contact). Whether the airspace above the rung constitutes the next level (which it does) is immaterial for this purpose, because contact is based on the steel, not the air. Skiing, driving, hooking, etc are only illegal if they contact the steel in the next level before losing contact with n-2. I don't see anything in these posts that indicated teams don't understand this?
Erik Huang
07-01-2013, 21:52
I believe this contest is really a test of team’s abilities to work together to scale that structure. That may be the reason why an individual robot can’t make contact with more than two rungs at a time and can only skip the first rung. It seems that we’re being setup to work together and it’s that feature that may in fact be designed into the game as the desired outcome by the game’s designers.
I brought that idea up at kickoff, but people were especially skeptical that such a thing might be possible. The amount of coordination between teams would be insane, especially if there isn't another robotics team near you.
Coming from the Montreal region, almost half of the teams at the Montreal regional will be rookies (either brand new teams, or 1 to 2 years old). Granted, some of them are insanely good, and are quickly catching up to us, but still, it would be really hard to organize and get everyone to stick with it.
If we could devise a standardized way to get two robots to climb together, that would be cool... but would it be a waste of time?
nuggetsyl
07-01-2013, 21:56
Seeing 3 robots all score the 30 point bonus on one tower will be like seeing the Loch Ness Monster this season.
(Seeing one climb that high in about 4 seconds after the buzzer on the other hand...)
:rolleyes:
There ya go Paul!
J.
I think you will see teams go up in 4 secs but if you can do it after the buzzer then i will bow down now.
Touch and "exist in" are not synonyms. The sequential & simultaneous contact rules are about just that (contact). Whether the airspace above the rung constitutes the next level (which it does) is immaterial for this purpose, because contact is based on the steel, not the air. Skiing, driving, hooking, etc are only illegal if they contact the steel in the next level before losing contact with n-2. I don't see anything in these posts that indicated teams don't understand this?
As I understand it, in order to ski up the rungs you must be supported by rungs 1 and 2, touch rung 3 and release rung 1, in that order. That is my concern; in order to meet the requirements of the rules, you must NOT touch rung 1 when you begin touching rung 3. That leaves you balancing on only rung 2. I don't see how that would work, but maybe I'm missing something.
I'm also taking into account that in order to score 10, 20 or 30 points, the robot must exist entirely above the plane that defines each zone. I don't think (from my reading) that a robot could, for instance, grab the first bar, then the second, release the first, grab the third, release the second, and be hanging with the wheels below the plane of first (or second) bar, and still get 30 points, regardless of whether the robot is touching any but the third bar.
I brought that idea up at kickoff, but people were especially skeptical that such a thing might be possible. The amount of coordination between teams would be insane, especially if there isn't another robotics team near you.
If we could devise a standardized way to get two robots to climb together, that would be cool... but would it be a waste of time?
So this coordination...how much would a team REALLY need beforehand? A team could design a robot that is nothing more than a rectangle with an unbelievably strong climbing mechanism to push robots up as needed. That's a reasonable plan, in my view.
What about this for a vaguely universal coordination system: http://ghilotti.com/assets/images/gallery-large/P014.jpg
Those are push pull scrapers. Basically one pulls up behind the other, lowers a big hoop onto a hook on the back of the other, and the amount of power available for pulling dirt up off the ground is instantly greater. So for FIRST teams, they could (very easily it seems) put a hook on the back and a window motor actuated hoop on the front and boom-universal system is ready to go. At least one team doing this has to be the first one on the pyramid, however, and they are going to need a climbing mechanism, so at least in theory a team could have only the hook on the back of their robot and others could hook on. Point is, this is well within the reach of most teams and the strains on a push pull scraper are many many times greater than what we would have with our FIRST robots, so making it smaller seems like it could work.
Now...does it make sense for teams to do this? I have no idea. I do think it's a reasonable thing for teams to put together and providing it does not violate any rules (none are coming to mind), it seems solid as long as a few teams close to one another do it.
this is cool
http://youtu.be/kqGOwqWBV-E
I'm also taking into account that in order to score 10, 20 or 30 points, the robot must exist entirely above the plane that defines each zone. I don't think (from my reading) that a robot could, for instance, grab the first bar, then the second, release the first, grab the third, release the second, and be hanging with the wheels below the plane of first (or second) bar, and still get 30 points, regardless of whether the robot is touching any but the third bar.Climb legality and scoring value are entirely different things. Climb legality is based on contact; scoring is based on the lowest point of your robot in space. Do you feel the manual has left this ambiguous? I can't quote it from my phone, but what would you want to see clarified?
Skiing: Ok, if that's your definition of skiing, then true (illegal). That isn't so much the way I've heard it used, but definitely agree people considering it should be made aware. Perhaps reach out to them directly?
What if you lift them up such that they never touch anything other than level 0?
Then the robot would not have performed a proper CLIMB, since it has not made contact with the pyramid. This results in no score.
Randomness
07-01-2013, 22:49
I brought that idea up at kickoff, but people were especially skeptical that such a thing might be possible. The amount of coordination between teams would be insane, especially if there isn't another robotics team near you.
Coming from the Montreal region, almost half of the teams at the Montreal regional will be rookies (either brand new teams, or 1 to 2 years old). Granted, some of them are insanely good, and are quickly catching up to us, but still, it would be really hard to organize and get everyone to stick with it.
If we could devise a standardized way to get two robots to climb together, that would be cool... but would it be a waste of time?
There is a standardized way: deploy a copy of the pyramid around one half of your robot (so including a corner and at least a few feet of bar to one side) at 30 inches. Any robot built to hang can then hang on that bar, then you can pull them up for 60 points. That depends on the other robot being able to hang, however.
It also depends on how you interpret the climbing rules... but it is my belief that robots have successfully climbed if they get to level 3 height without touching any parts of the pyramid.
...I believe this contest is really a test of team’s abilities to work together to scale that structure. That may be the reason why an individual robot can’t make contact with more than two rungs at a time and can only skip the first rung. It seems that we’re being setup to work together and it’s that feature that may in fact be designed into the game as the desired outcome by the game’s designers.
...
Under what circumstances can a robot skip the first rung? I read the game manual 3.1.5.2 as requiring contact with the pyramid in each zone (to get the points of the higher zones). Maybe you meant a robot climbing up the corner, so it contacts the pyramid on the corner piece in zone 1?
Here is a way two robots working together could score 40 points legally, relatively easily.
Robot A: Flat top 8" off the ground with a ramp.
Robot B: Vertical arm with hook on top, extendible to 83 inches (max height is 84 inches)
1) Both robots drive into pyramid.
2) Robot B drives on top of robot A.
3) Robot A drives to center of pyramid.
4) Robot B extends arm 25 inches (25+8=33)
5) Robot A drives so robot B's arm taps zone 1 bar.
6) Robot A drives to center of pyramid.
7) Robot B extends arm 55 inches (55+8=63)
8) Robot A drives so robot B's arm taps zone 2 bar.
9) Robot A drives to center of pyramid.
10) Robot B extends arm 83 inches (83+8=91)
11) Robot A drives so robot A's arm hooks onto zone 3 bar.
12) Robot B retracts arm (or activates winch) and raises itself straight up into zone 3 for 30 points.
This sequence follows the rules for climbing the pyramid precisely, robot B contacting each level sequentially and never contacting more than two levels at once.
For even more scoring goodness, robot A then raises an arm, hooks the zone 1 bar and lifts off the floor for another 10 points.
pfreivald
07-01-2013, 23:05
It also depends on how you interpret the climbing rules... but it is my belief that robots have successfully climbed if they get to level 3 height without touching any parts of the pyramid.
That seems to be in direct conflict with the rules.
nuggetsyl
07-01-2013, 23:08
Here is a way two robots working together could score 30 points legally, relatively easily.
Robot A: Flat top 8" off the ground with a ramp.
Robot B: Vertical arm with hook on top, extendible to 83 inches (max height is 84 inches)
1) Both robots drive into pyramid.
2) Robot B drives on top of robot A.
3) Robot A drives to center of pyramid.
4) Robot B extends arm 25 inches (25+8=33)
5) Robot A drives so robot B's arm taps zone 1 bar.
6) Robot A drives to center of pyramid.
7) Robot B extends arm 55 inches (55+8=63)
8) Robot A drives so robot B's arm taps zone 2 bar.
9) Robot A drives to center of pyramid.
10) Robot B extends arm 83 inches (83+8=91)
11) Robot A drives so robot A's arm hooks onto zone 3 bar.
12) Robot B retracts arm (or activates winch) and raises itself straight up into zone 3 for 30 points.
This sequence follows the rules for climbing the pyramid precisely, robot B contacting each level sequentially and never contacting more than two levels at once.
Teams had a hard time feeding balls to great shooters last year so I feel safe in saying this is not going to happen.
I'm not committed yet to the idea that scoring and climbing are entirely separate in terms of legality. I think there is some ambiguity that will need to be clarified on Wednesday. One reason is the weirdness of the idea that you must touch the footing (level 0) of the pyramid before progressing to the first rung. 3.1.5.2 could be interpreted as equating the "pyramid" not with the metal bars but with the zones controlled by the bars.
The implications of zones rather than bars are:
1) it will be a lot more difficult to grab the bars if level 1 ends at the plane tangent to the top of bar 1; climbing the corners may be the only feasible method.
2) If a robot is fortunate enough to have reached level 2, it could drop a line to a waiting alliance member below, and carry that robot up enough to no longer be in level 0.
If bars rather than zones,
1) climbing the rungs becomes more feasible (though still difficult).
2) a robot at level 3 could lower a cable to a robot partner on the ground, and lift it up, so long as the lower robot reaches out and touches the pyramid at specific points.
TRIron95
07-01-2013, 23:30
Here is a way two robots working together could score 40 points legally, relatively easily.
Robot A: Flat top 8" off the ground with a ramp.
Robot B: Vertical arm with hook on top, extendible to 83 inches (max height is 84 inches)
1) Both robots drive into pyramid.
2) Robot B drives on top of robot A.
3) Robot A drives to center of pyramid.
4) Robot B extends arm 25 inches (25+8=33)
5) Robot A drives so robot B's arm taps zone 1 bar.
6) Robot A drives to center of pyramid.
7) Robot B extends arm 55 inches (55+8=63)
8) Robot A drives so robot B's arm taps zone 2 bar.
9) Robot A drives to center of pyramid.
10) Robot B extends arm 83 inches (83+8=91)
11) Robot A drives so robot A's arm hooks onto zone 3 bar.
12) Robot B retracts arm (or activates winch) and raises itself straight up into zone 3 for 30 points.
This sequence follows the rules for climbing the pyramid precisely, robot B contacting each level sequentially and never contacting more than two levels at once.
For even more scoring goodness, robot A then raises an arm, hooks the zone 1 bar and lifts off the floor for another 10 points.
Extending the arm over 54" seems to be in violation with the rule that says your robot must never extend outside a 54" diameter cylinder.
Extending the arm over 54" seems to be in violation with the rule that says your robot must never extend outside a 54" diameter cylinder.
I believe he means to extend the arm 54" vertically, rather than horizontally.
Extending the arm over 54" seems to be in violation with the rule that says your robot must never extend outside a 54" diameter cylinder.
The max envelope is a cylinder 54" in diameter, 84 inches tall.
engunneer
07-01-2013, 23:39
For any teams that have a 3D printer, I just published a design that might help you think about climbing. I made the model for my desk at home so I can stare at it and imagine all the robots climbing up.
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:40727
For any teams that have a 3D printer, I just published a design that might help you think about climbing. I made the model for my desk at home so I can stare at it and imagine all the robots climbing up.
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:40727
That is super cool.
engunneer
07-01-2013, 23:44
If bars rather than zones,
1) climbing the rungs becomes more feasible (though still difficult).
2) a robot at level 3 could lower a cable to a robot partner on the ground, and lift it up, so long as the lower robot reaches out and touches the pyramid at specific points.
I believe this is the interpretation that was intended. They would not have made the pyramid as it is without intending teams to climb the outer or inner 'faces' of the pyramid.
your second point about lifting a robot that touches each section in sequence (probably by being bounced off the horizontal bars along the way) seems like a legal corner case to me.
Here's another cooperation idea.
The trickiest part of the climb is leaving zone 0 before touching the zone 2 bar. If you could sit on the floor and reach up to the zone 2 bar (touching zone 1 bar first, of course), inch worming up to the top isn't too hard.
So, robot A deploys a tarp from a roll and tows the tarp under the lowest bar, spreading it out to cover the ground. The tarp could be pretty big and not violate the 54" diameter rule. Robot B drives onto the tarp, thus leaving contact with zone 0, and inchworms up the pyramid, from bar to bar.
Robot A then reels in the tarp and hangs for ten points. Much less coordination between the two robots.
On the subject of coopertition...
A few kids on my team had the idea of a skyhook that would reach down and grab a friendly robot by attaching to the eyelets/connecting points that are meant for the belay system. Making a skyhook, though, will be tough.
nathan_hui
08-01-2013, 00:54
On the subject of coopertition...
A few kids on my team had the idea of a skyhook that would reach down and grab a friendly robot by attaching to the eyelets/connecting points that are meant for the belay system. Making a skyhook, though, will be tough.
I thought skyhooks were in the same genre as snipe hunts. Odd that they would be useful for design ideas...
Just prop yourself up on an air cylinder "foot" on top of a frisbee, throw a batman hook to rung 2 (making sure to somehow touch rung 1 in the process) and hang for a quick 20, or climb for a slower 30.
My team is thinking about two options at this point.
A. A tall robot that will position a v shaved divot around the corner and haul itself up via belt or arms and ratcheting over the knuckles (Keeping the base horizontal to the floor)
or
B. A short robot that would drive up the corner, forcing itself up on a rail, and pulling itself up along the bottom of the robot using neumatic pistons, also using the ratcheting system.
Just prop yourself up on an air cylinder "foot" on top of a frisbee, throw a batman hook to rung 2 (making sure to somehow touch rung 1 in the process) and hang for a quick 20, or climb for a slower 30.
Strategies using discs to aid or inhibit climbing are out per G16.
Nuttyman54
08-01-2013, 01:38
Just prop yourself up on an air cylinder "foot" on top of a frisbee, throw a batman hook to rung 2 (making sure to somehow touch rung 1 in the process) and hang for a quick 20, or climb for a slower 30.
G16: TEAMS and/or ROBOTS may not employ strategies that use DISCS to either aid or inhibit a ROBOT CLIMB.
Violation: TECHNICAL FOUL. If the DISC(S) inhibits an opponent’s CLIMB attempt, the opponent ROBOT’S ALLIANCE is awarded points for a successful Level 3 CLIMB.
Sorry, no dice! (nice idea though)
Ah was playing off the tarp idea. A retractable "parachute" seems more attractive now.
TJ Cawley
08-01-2013, 02:02
i'm an alumni of Team 1108, Panther Robotics and we have our 2nd robot which was apart of the 2004 FIRST Frenzy game. our climbing mechanism is a winch made from the CIM equivalent motor paired with a Dualt drill transmission. this combination was indestructible durring competition and had no problems lifting a 140 lb robot (battery weight included)
gabrielau23
08-01-2013, 02:13
Teams had a hard time feeding balls to great shooters last year so I feel safe in saying this is not going to happen.
lolol. The only consistent "feeding" I saw was during autonomous when a team programmed their bot to regurgitate all their balls into an excellent shooter. Other than that....lol. This requires WAY too much coordination for two teams who haven't even met before.
Randomness
08-01-2013, 03:20
That seems to be in direct conflict with the rules.
So I wouldn't be surprised to see my interpretation disallowed on Q and A, but I do think that it works as the rules stand.
Here it goes:
"Points are awarded for the highest Level achieved for every ALLIANCE ROBOT that CLIMBS its PYRAMID. The Level to which a ROBOT has CLIMBED is determined by the lowest point of the ROBOT (in relation to the FIELD). CLIMB point values and Levels are defined in Figure 3-4.
A ROBOT has CLIMBED its PYRAMID if it contacts the PYRAMID in sequential order (Level 0, 1, 2, 3) during ascent and no more than two (2) Levels simultaneously.
If a CLIMB is considered unacceptable (e.g. a ROBOT has touched non-adjacent Levels or more than two (2) Levels at a time), a Referee will indicate a rejected CLIMB by turning the offending ROBOT’S PLAYER STATION LED strings yellow. The ROBOT will be ineligible for CLIMB points unless and until it begins a new CLIMB from the floor, Level 0."
So a robot that is boosted past 60'' is at the highest Level, and the rules say that a robot gets credit for the highest Level (the top) for a successful CLIMB (passing the following criteria). The question is whether or not it has CLIMBED legally. Did the robot contact the pyramid in sequential order? Well, probably - it certainly wasn't out of order, as all it touched was level 0, and the rules never specifically state that robots much contact each level that they want credit for. And the robot clearly hasn't contacted more than two levels simultaneously.
If you look at the (e.g ...) section in the third paragraph, then a boosted robot has succeeded even more easily - it definitely didn't touch non-adjacent levels or more than two at a time. That said, other scenarios that pass the (e.g. ...) part fail the first part.
Bottom line: would I be surprised if Q and A said that I was wrong? Not really. But it does make sense to make it slightly easier for teams to help others, as there are additional coordination/strategy problems with assisting others.
pmangels17
08-01-2013, 08:44
It seems that many people want to climb the corner. However, it is going to be near impossible to keep from spinning. There would need to be an incredibly complex system to prevent spinning without breaking the device
It seems that many people want to climb the corner. However, it is going to be near impossible to keep from spinning. There would need to be an incredibly complex system to prevent spinning without breaking the device
A robot climbing the corner, particularly from the outside, could use the floor and/or rungs to avoid spinning. It's not easy, but I wouldn't characterize it as "near impossible" or "incredibly complex". Our team is working on a few concepts along these lines, but nothing solid yet.
JamesCH95
08-01-2013, 09:17
That's one of the most complicated elements of this climb. It cannot be accomplished using a method that is intuitive to how a human would complete the task (aside from jumping up the levels but I don't think most people will feel comfortable with a 100-something lb robot jumping around 5'-8' in the air).
I think this is a bad assumption. Humans employ several different ways of climbing depending on the person, their build, and any athletic training they might have.
It seems that many people want to climb the corner. However, it is going to be near impossible to keep from spinning. There would need to be an incredibly complex system to prevent spinning without breaking the device
I think that this is a bad assumption also.
It seems like a lot of ideas require claws or grippers which do not rotate on the pipe. Would a pipe wrench mechanism work in this situation? It would allow you to pivot your robot up in one direction without rotating back due to your center of gravity. I don't know if it would properly grip the pyramid or if it would damage the pipes, but perhaps someone could test this. (I say someone and not me because I am just an alum and my team doesn't want to climb past lvl 1).
mikegrundvig
08-01-2013, 11:26
It seems that many people want to climb the corner. However, it is going to be near impossible to keep from spinning. There would need to be an incredibly complex system to prevent spinning without breaking the device
There are very clever design ideas that can climb the corner and provide for stability without requiring a gorilla grip on the pipe or rungs.
-Mike
Brian Selle
08-01-2013, 12:32
lolol. The only consistent "feeding" I saw was during autonomous when a team programmed their bot to regurgitate all their balls into an excellent shooter. Other than that....lol. This requires WAY too much coordination for two teams who haven't even met before.
The thing that's different this year is that many teams will have hoppers to accept Frisbees from the loading station. If you can make your robot look like a feeder slot chances are you will be able to find a mate.
RSaunders
08-01-2013, 12:48
It seems like a lot of ideas require claws or grippers which do not rotate on the pipe. Would a pipe wrench mechanism work in this situation? It would allow you to pivot your robot up in one direction without rotating back due to your center of gravity. I don't know if it would properly grip the pyramid or if it would damage the pipes, but perhaps someone could test this.
After working on assembling a practice tower, I don't thing that a non-slip grip on a pipe is a good idea. The pipes we used weren't powder coated, and pipe wrenches visibly damaged them with less than 50 pounds of force. To grip the pipe without damaging the finish seems very difficult. I guess it's a function of how many square inches of contact patch you have, but the sub-inch contact patch of a pipe wrench isn't enough.
We've been looking at leverage against the tower support posts below the horizontal pipes, they are in the same zone. A pretty compact "claw" can make solid three-point contact with a single Level of the pyramid and support 150 pounds with compression contact only.
After working on assembling a practice tower, I don't thing that a non-slip grip on a pipe is a good idea. The pipes we used weren't powder coated, and pipe wrenches visibly damaged them with less than 50 pounds of force. To grip the pipe without damaging the finish seems very difficult. I guess it's a function of how many square inches of contact patch you have, but the sub-inch contact patch of a pipe wrench isn't enough.Thank you for the insight! Do you think the corner pipes could still hold up to something like this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHmRrZ9asEo) (notwithstanding the horizontal rung 'bumps'), or is there still a serious risk of field damage?
That was my initial idea, but you would not reach past the first level because of the notches on the side which stick out about an inch.
You could have a mechanism that grabs onto the notches lift you up just enough that you can then go back to climbing the rail
cadandcookies
08-01-2013, 14:15
(I say someone and not me because I am just an alum and my team doesn't want to climb past lvl 1).
Hey! Not precisely true! We're prototyping for both level one and level three designs!
On another note, perhaps a dual engagement version of 2056's 2010 climbing mechanism would work. The first "climber" contacts the module, and the robot is lifted to vertical (or maybe so that the side of the robot is roughly parallel to the side pole, rolls up to the first bump, at which point the second set engages above the bump and the first stage disengages. Repeating this process would lead to a "hand-over-hand" approach to climbing the side.
Of course, balance would be a possible issue here...
Challenges like this are what makes FIRST so fun!
MrBydlon
08-01-2013, 14:57
Hey! Not precisely true! We're prototyping for both level one and level three designs!
On another note, perhaps a dual engagement version of 2056's 2010 climbing mechanism would work. The first "climber" contacts the module, and the robot is lifted to vertical (or maybe so that the side of the robot is roughly parallel to the side pole, rolls up to the first bump, at which point the second set engages above the bump and the first stage disengages. Repeating this process would lead to a "hand-over-hand" approach to climbing the side.
Of course, balance would be a possible issue here...
Challenges like this are what makes FIRST so fun!
This is EXACTLY what our team originally talked about! We based our original thinking off of Team 33 Killer Bees' hanger arm but essentially the same idea. A tumbling robot up the pyramid. The first arm would rotate the robot 180 degrees. Then the second would grip and flip the robot over again and so on.
Our new thoughts have gone in a direction of two arms and a horseshoe shaped wide robot. Lots more prototyping to do...
cadandcookies
08-01-2013, 16:46
Actually we were thinking sans the tumbling, as that seems overly complicated. As much as I love to see robots flipping over, it seems slower and more prone to failure than a (fairly) straight shot up the pyramid.
Do you think that the horseshoe is an inefficient use of perimeter? Or is it really just having an open side? I am interested in seeing what mechanism makes that make sense though...
Actually we were thinking sans the tumbling, as that seems overly complicated. As much as I love to see robots flipping over, it seems slower and more prone to failure than a (fairly) straight shot up the pyramid.
Do you think that the horseshoe is an inefficient use of perimeter? Or is it really just having an open side? I am interested in seeing what mechanism makes that make sense though...
If what you mean by a horseshoe shaped frame is a frame wih a cutout on one side for an intake mechanism or for climbing purposes, it does not get included in the 112 inches of robot perimeter; the perimeter is the convex frame of the robot, so it does not include cutouts. See the rectangluar robot picture in Rule R03, figure 4.1.
I think there will be teams that manage to climb by repeated flipping the robot as previously described, but in my understanding, it would require a failry flat and symmetric robot, which could heavily constrain the designs of a shooter and hopper.
cadandcookies
08-01-2013, 18:15
If what you mean by a horseshoe shaped frame is a frame wih a cutout on one side for an intake mechanism or for climbing purposes, it does not get included in the 112 inches of robot perimeter; the perimeter is the convex frame of the robot, so it does not include cutouts. See the rectangluar robot picture in Rule R03, figure 4.1.
Ah. Thanks for explaining that. It makes more sense now.
I think there will be teams that manage to climb by repeated flipping the robot as previously described, but in my understanding, it would require a failry flat and symmetric robot, which could heavily constrain the designs of a shooter and hopper.
I'm betting there will be teams that do it too. I am fairly sure you could do it with a rectangular-ly shaped robot in non-three dimensions, if the superstructure was supportive enough. I would see it as attaching the first side face, then pulling up, then attaching from the top of that face, and pulling up, and so on. Of course, that's just a concept.
Oakley Marie
08-01-2013, 20:12
:deadhorse:
mendeleev79
08-01-2013, 22:01
Not sure if this idea has been said yet, but I thought it might work to have a setup similar to the Team 2648 Breakaway bot (http://www.team2648.com/our-robots.html). If you have two of the arms shown on each end of the robot, it would be fairly easy to have one attach to the first level, lift the robot off the ground, and then have the second arm on the back attach to level 2. I don't think it would be feasible for it to reach level 3, but I thought it was a decent plan.
A problem with this, however, is that the first level is only 30 inches off the ground, which might make it difficult to accomplish the lifting mechanism shown.
Any ideas on this?
F22Rapture
08-01-2013, 22:34
A problem with this, however, is that the first level is only 30 inches off the ground, which might make it difficult to accomplish the lifting mechanism shown.
Any ideas on this?
A ROBOT has CLIMBED its PYRAMID if it contacts the PYRAMID in
A. sequential order (Level 0, 1, 2, 3) during ascent and B. no more than two (2) Levels simultaneously.
Emphasis mine
I'm interpreting this that you don't have to "climb" the first level, merely touch it. So maybe if you did a Robot-in-3-days-esque climber that barely lifts the robot at all, and that would be enough to "contact" the first level and continue on to the second.
pfreivald
08-01-2013, 22:42
Emphasis mine
I'm interpreting this that you don't have to "climb" the first level, merely touch it. So maybe if you did a Robot-in-3-days-esque climber that barely lifts the robot at all, and that would be enough to "contact" the first level and continue on to the second.
I think the hard part is not re-contacting the floor once you've lifted yourself onto level one. A level-one chin-up will be difficult to turn into a level-two climb, methinks...
Those grippers that just don't slide when they grab a pipe might damage the powdercoat, and that might disqualify mechanisms from gameplay. (I'm not sure on that one, but it's worth considering.)
Nuttyman54
08-01-2013, 22:43
Emphasis mine
I'm interpreting this that you don't have to "climb" the first level, merely touch it. So maybe if you did a Robot-in-3-days-esque climber that barely lifts the robot at all, and that would be enough to "contact" the first level and continue on to the second.
Points for the climb are awarded based on the zone lowest point on the robot occupies. If you touch level 1 but do not lift off of level 0 (the ground), you will be awarded points based on being "in" level 0, which is no points. You must lift off the ground to receive level 1 points.
Those grippers that just don't slide when they grab a pipe might damage the powdercoat, and that might disqualify mechanisms from gameplay. (I'm not sure on that one, but it's worth considering.)I'm really worried about this, and I'm a little surprised there hasn't been more talk of it--am I missing something? I still like the 2010-esque latches (that can move out of the way of the horizontal crossbars) for this, but I don't even know how I'd know if they damaged the powercoat until competition time. Heck of a thing to be find illegal and lose 10-30pts/match over.
@Nuttyman54: you know you're agreeing with him, right? ;) (re: "barely lifts the robot")
F22Rapture
08-01-2013, 23:38
Points for the climb are awarded based on the zone lowest point on the robot occupies. If you touch level 1 but do not lift off of level 0 (the ground), you will be awarded points based on being "in" level 0, which is no points. You must lift off the ground to receive level 1 points.
My point was, if you go back and look at the video he linked, he expressed concerns that that mechanism wouldn't work because (paraphrasing) "it had to climb level one first, which is only 30" high." I was saying that because the wording of the rule is "contacts," it doesn't have to. It has to touch each level sequentially, and no more than two at once, but it doesn't have to climb each and every level.
So, my thought was, a mechanism that clearly touches the first level (by lifting the robot slightly) would be enough to satisfy that requirement before using the mechanism in the video to lift up to level 2, and hang for the 20 points.
Jorge Ayala
09-01-2013, 01:22
Is this legal? http://youtu.be/OY4BAbgWvdY
I see the robot being in more than two leves at the same time but only touching two.
nikeairmancurry
09-01-2013, 01:26
Is this legal? http://youtu.be/OY4BAbgWvdY
I see the robot being in more than two leves at the same time but only touching two.
I would say yes, after the hook is placed you are only contacting two levels (it looks like the track maybe contacting the 2nd level) the floor and first. Then after the lift, the robot is in level one only. When the second hook is deployed, you are in contact with on two levels again, making it still a legal climb and so on.
This was an idea I presented today, I think its a great one.
Garten Haeska
09-01-2013, 02:31
I've read through this entire thread and i was just confused. Are you allowed to drive into the pyramid and latch onto the second rung and winch yourselves up or do you have to touch the first rung first? Or is it that if you are outside the pyramid and latch onto the second rung and winch your self to victory? Are they both legal? Neither? Please help or at least some clarification.
Do you or any one else know what kind of powder coat it is? I have heard that depending on how it's done the powder coat could make the steel either slick or gritty.
It's very slick. Check out the video from the kickoff:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bp4cILBW-xM
I've read through this entire thread and i was just confused. Are you allowed to drive into the pyramid and latch onto the second rung and winch yourselves up or do you have to touch the first rung first? Or is it that if you are outside the pyramid and latch onto the second rung and winch your self to victory? Are they both legal? Neither? Please help or at least some clarification.
[I underlined the part I'm responding to.]
This would not be a legal climb (it would get 0 points). Game Manual section 3.1.5.2 says the robot must contact the pyramid levels in sequential order. This proposal would contact level 0 (floor) and 2 (second rung), but not level 1.
If you modify this somehow to make it valid, it would be 20 points.
vikesrock777
09-01-2013, 10:30
I've read through this entire thread and i was just confused. Are you allowed to drive into the pyramid and latch onto the second rung and winch yourselves up or do you have to touch the first rung first? Or is it that if you are outside the pyramid and latch onto the second rung and winch your self to victory? Are they both legal? Neither? Please help or at least some clarification.
To expand on what Cal578 said, you need to make sure you observe both of the rules when performing your climb.
A ROBOT has CLIMBED its PYRAMID if it contacts the PYRAMID and/or the floor (Level 0) in
sequential order (Level 0, 1, 2, 3) during ascent and
no more than two (2) Levels simultaneously.
In order for a legal climb to get to level 2 points, you need to contact sequentially and contact no more than 2 levels simultaneously. This means that you must first contact the pyramid at level one and lift yourself such that you are no longer contacting the floor (level 0). Only then can you contact level 2 and lift yourself into that zone.
I'm glad vikesrock expanded on what I said. I actually meant to respond to both proposals. I don't know why I only underlined the second. There isn't any difference (from a rules point of view) between climbing inside or outside the pyramid.
Kevin Sevcik
09-01-2013, 22:39
Is this legal? http://youtu.be/OY4BAbgWvdY
I see the robot being in more than two leves at the same time but only touching two.
This was an idea I presented today, I think its a great one.It's interesting, but I'm concerned that you don't have bumpers drawn in there. I suspect it's going to be pretty difficult to get a bumper over the rung if you're lifting like that.
Nuttyman54
09-01-2013, 22:48
It's interesting, but I'm concerned that you don't have bumpers drawn in there. I suspect it's going to be pretty difficult to get a bumper over the rung if you're lifting like that.
You could always drop a small wedge over the top of the bumper to make it ride smooth. There are ways around bumpers if you need it.
nikeairmancurry
09-01-2013, 23:11
You could always drop a small wedge over the top of the bumper to make it ride smooth. There are ways around bumpers if you need it.
Exactly.
So Q&A clarified some things today. The following are now confirmed true:
1) The floor is level 0; not the footings of the pyramid.
2) The airspace and the pyramid are not the same thing for climbing legalities. Your robot can "exist" in the airspace of levels 1, 2 and 3 at the same time as long as it only touches the pyramid on two or less of those levels at once.
Question: does anyone think it would be a good idea to plan for the following scenario?
Robot A successfully climbs to level 3 and lowers a winch with a "claw" (or other lifting device) to robot B, waiting on the ground. The winch doesn't touch the ground (thus nullifying the climb), only the top of robot B. It lifts robot B off the ground. If B is only lifted to level 1, both robots get only 10 points each. If lifted to level 2, both robots get 20 points each. In certain circumstances, robot B might be lifted as high as level 3.
This would only work if alliance robots have some sort of bar attached to the top of their robot which allows them to be lifted. Level 3 could only be accomplished if both bots were tiny and well balanced.
Worth the effort?
nikeairmancurry
09-01-2013, 23:40
So Q&A clarified some things today. The following are now confirmed true:
1) The floor is level 0; not the footings of the pyramid.
2) The airspace and the pyramid are not the same thing for climbing legalities. Your robot can "exist" in the airspace of levels 1, 2 and 3 at the same time as long as it only touches the pyramid on two or less of those levels at once.
Question: does anyone think it would be a good idea to plan for the following scenario?
Robot A successfully climbs to level 3 and lowers a winch with a "claw" (or other lifting device) to robot B, waiting on the ground. The winch doesn't touch the ground (thus nullifying the climb), only the top of robot B. It lifts robot B off the ground. If B is only lifted to level 1, both robots get only 10 points each. If lifted to level 2, both robots get 20 points each. In certain circumstances, robot B might be lifted as high as level 3.
This would only work if alliance robots have some sort of bar attached to the top of their robot which allows them to be lifted. Level 3 could only be accomplished if both bots were tiny and well balanced.
Worth the effort?
The way to score points for climbing is, the robot has to touch each level as it climbs, so robot B would get zero points.
vikesrock777
10-01-2013, 01:48
The way to score points for climbing is, the robot has to touch each level as it climbs, so robot B would get zero points.
Please quote rules when making statements to give proof, as I would disagree with the one you just made. When climbing, a robot can't touch two non-adjacent levels and it can't touch 3 levels at once, per section 3.1.5.2. I don't see anything requiring a touch of every level. Because robot B only contacted zone 0, they satisfy the requirements as currently written for a valid hang.
Please quote rules when making statements to give proof, as I would disagree with the one you just made. When climbing, a robot can't touch two non-adjacent levels and it can't touch 3 levels at once, per section 3.1.5.2. I don't see anything requiring a touch of every level. Because robot B only contacted zone 0, they satisfy the requirements as currently written for a valid hang.
And yet somehow the rules (http://frc-manual.usfirst.org/viewItem/180#3.1.5.2) explicitly state that "A ROBOT has CLIMBED its PYRAMID if it contacts the PYRAMID and/or the floor (Level 0) in ... sequential order (Level 0, 1, 2, 3) during ascent."
There's nothing wrong with asking for people to quote the rules, but please at least read one page of this thread before calling someone out.
vikesrock777
10-01-2013, 02:21
And yet somehow the rules (http://frc-manual.usfirst.org/viewItem/180#3.1.5.2) explicitly state that "A ROBOT has CLIMBED its PYRAMID if it contacts the PYRAMID and/or the floor (Level 0) in ... sequential order (Level 0, 1, 2, 3) during ascent."
Underline mine.
Am I breaking the numerical sequence and contacting non-adjacent levels if I go from level 0 to being supported by something else entirely? I fail to see how this would be breaking the sequence. The proposed solution never contacts levels 2 or 3, so it doesn't break the order of (Level 0, 1, 2, 3), it just doesn't continue past 0.
Justin Montois
10-01-2013, 04:46
.... I don't see anything requiring a touch of every level....
Do you see it now? You don't have to touch every level. Only the ones you want credit for and only if you want a valid climb. Heck you don't even have to climb at all if you don't want too.
Underline mine.
Am I breaking the numerical sequence and contacting non-adjacent levels if I go from level 0 to being supported by something else entirely? I fail to see how this would be breaking the sequence. The proposed solution never contacts levels 2 or 3, so it doesn't break the order of (Level 0, 1, 2, 3), it just doesn't continue past 0.
I'm going to assume that by "being supported by something else entirely" you mean another robot. In this case, you're right, you can go from the ground, up in the air with the assistance from another robot. It's just not worth any points unless after leaving level 0, the next level you contact is level one.
Excuse the fact that I'm not going to post the rule needed because it was already posted in reference to your last post.
On a side note, sorry for pushing your robot over at Championship last year.
I forgot one of the important aspects, forgive me. Robot B would swing a bit on the cable, enough to touch the bars as it ascends. Now worth it?
nikeairmancurry
10-01-2013, 08:47
I forgot one of the important aspects, forgive me. Robot B would swing a bit on the cable, enough to touch the bars as it ascends. Now worth it?
That would now be worth points for robot B, as it would now touch the levels in order, until its final spot, making it a valid climb.
mprikril
10-01-2013, 10:50
So Q&A clarified some things today. The following are now confirmed true:
1) The floor is level 0; not the footings of the pyramid.
Where did you see this in the Q&A section? No one on our team can find this question / answer.
Thanks
vikesrock777
10-01-2013, 11:29
Where did you see this in the Q&A section? No one on our team can find this question / answer.
Thanks
I would guess they were referring to the January 8th team update for this part:
http://frc-manual.usfirst.org/Updates/0
The specific quote, with new text in bold.
A ROBOT has CLIMBED its PYRAMID if it contacts the PYRAMID and/or the floor (Level 0) in
sequential order (Level 0, 1, 2, 3) during ascent and
no more than two (2) Levels simultaneously.
This seems to clarify that level 0 is indeed the floor. I hope that answers your question!
I'm going to assume that by "being supported by something else entirely" you mean another robot. In this case, you're right, you can go from the ground, up in the air with the assistance from another robot. It's just not worth any points unless after leaving level 0, the next level you contact is level one.While true, the rules do not currently require you to contact any level besides 0 in order to receive climb points. (Sequence = 0 and Max Simultaneous Levels = 1, then climb legal and credit given by lowest point on robot)
There'll be a Q&A question to by this afternoon at the latest, so no need heat up the debate too much. Anyone interested in suspending, stay tuned.
Night_Shade
10-01-2013, 14:44
We are working on our robot design ideas. I was wondering if this idea would work.
Our idea is to have three arms. Two are going to grab onto the bar while the third keeps it in place.:] We want to get to the third level then dump four of the color frisbees in. Any ideas to help with the design? We need an idea for how we are fully going to climb the tower.
Night_Shade
Kevin Sevcik
10-01-2013, 16:22
While true, the rules do not currently require you to contact any level besides 0 in order to receive climb points. (Sequence = 0 and Max Simultaneous Levels = 1, then climb legal and credit given by lowest point on robot)
There'll be a Q&A question to by this afternoon at the latest, so no need heat up the debate too much. Anyone interested in suspending, stay tuned.
What Siri says. There's nothing in the rules that says you have to touch a particular level before you can be scored in that level. This interpretation assumes that if you're only touching the floor, you have a valid climb. Then you proceed up the pyramid and have the chance to invalidate your climb by breaking one of the two climbing rules. Once you invalidate your climb, you have to go back to the floor as the starting valid state.
The opposing interpretation implies that you have to actively fulfill those two rules to create a valid climb. Which raises the question of whether you have to climb all the way to level 3 to create a valid climb, since the rules don't mention anything about stopping.
Orion.DeYoe
11-01-2013, 10:29
I'm really worried about this, and I'm a little surprised there hasn't been more talk of it--am I missing something? I still like the 2010-esque latches (that can move out of the way of the horizontal crossbars) for this, but I don't even know how I'd know if they damaged the powercoat until competition time. Heck of a thing to be find illegal and lose 10-30pts/match over.
Our team might have our tower powder coated. I'll have to mention testing some of these things to the mentors. Most likely we're going with a non-clamping design.
falconmaster
11-01-2013, 16:23
Here is our plan that we are trying to flesh out
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B44TPv-TccPZTTVWLUV0Z0JlM1U/edit
Hope it works
_____________
Mike9966
11-01-2013, 16:50
Ok, I don't mean to picky here, but I just realized what might be a problem. Imagine a hook that fits on the bar. Since the hook is touching the top of the bar, and the middle of the bar, this hook is touching the pyramid in 2 levels.
If you had hooks of any sort that pulled you up with say, something holding you on a lower bar, 1 level, and the one above is hooked on a bar, you are in 3 zones, if only by the quarter inch thickness of the claw.........
Any thoughts? Would they be this picky in the rules?
Thanks
Mike
notmattlythgoe
11-01-2013, 16:57
Ok, I don't mean to picky here, but I just realized what might be a problem. Imagine a hook that fits on the bar. Since the hook is touching the top of the bar, and the middle of the bar, this hook is touching the pyramid in 2 levels.
If you had hooks of any sort that pulled you up with say, something holding you on a lower bar, 1 level, and the one above is hooked on a bar, you are in 3 zones, if only by the quarter inch thickness of the claw.........
Any thoughts? Would they be this picky in the rules?
Thanks
Mike
The bar counts as being in the zone below it.
If you had hooks of any sort that pulled you up with say, something holding you on a lower bar, 1 level, and the one above is hooked on a bar, you are in 3 zones, if only by the quarter inch thickness of the claw.........
Any thoughts? Would they be this picky in the rules?
You can only not CONTACT more than 2 levels at once. You can OCCUPY as many as you'd like.
Bonekiller407
11-01-2013, 21:38
Ok are team is at a bit of a standstill on climbing. We realized that our climbing idea won't work because of the rule that says we can't extend outside a 54" cylinder. So we decided to figure out a way to go up the corner legs. Any ideas?
Ok are team is at a bit of a standstill on climbing. We realized that our climbing idea won't work because of the rule that says we can't extend outside a 54" cylinder. So we decided to figure out a way to go up the corner legs. Any ideas?
We're trying to do what some teams did for 2010, with a grab and turn mechanism. We grab onto the pole, flip, and with a second arm, grab, flip, and repeat until we get up to the top.
Climbing seems much more difficult than we anticipated.
Our strategy put climbing ahead of shooting, but I'm beginning to think that that wasn't the best idea.
kevin.li.rit
11-01-2013, 22:46
Anyways... No one I've mentioned this too really likes my idea but it goes like this...
I simply use a spring loaded a "jumping" mechanism that would catapult my robot towards the top rung. While in mid flight, the robot reaches out and briefly touches level 1 and 2 in that order, then grasps on to the top rung.
I enjoy imagining what would happen if it misses...
Kevin Sevcik
11-01-2013, 22:50
Anyways... No one I've mentioned this too really likes my idea but it goes like this...
I simply use a spring loaded a "jumping" mechanism that would catapult my robot towards the top rung. While in mid flight, the robot reaches out and briefly touches level 1 and 2 in that order, then grasps on to the top rung.
I enjoy imagining what would happen if it misses...I'm enjoying imagining the look on your Lead Robot Inspector's face when you tell him that.
kevin.li.rit
11-01-2013, 22:53
I'm enjoying imagining the look on your Lead Robot Inspector's face when you tell him that.
Well, I would say, "Hey, we have bumpers." And I can always install a parachute...
pfreivald
11-01-2013, 22:57
Well, I would say, "Hey, we have bumpers." And I can always install a parachute...
...at which point Ether would post a pithy comment about the math underlying the parachute and why this is unwise. ;)
smclean1969
11-01-2013, 22:57
re: "I simply use a spring loaded a "jumping" mechanism that would catapult my robot towards the top rung. While in mid flight, the robot reaches out and briefly touches level 1 and 2 in that order, then grasps on to the top rung."
There are some tough challenges here. The amount of power required to have a 120 lb (150 lb w/battery and bumpers) robot 'jump' ~9' is ridiculous and extremely dangerous. The skill level required to do this and touch the levels and then grasp the top row is outrageously difficult. You're much better off just grabbing the bottom row and picking up an easy 10 points.
kevin.li.rit
11-01-2013, 23:03
re: "I simply use a spring loaded a "jumping" mechanism that would catapult my robot towards the top rung. While in mid flight, the robot reaches out and briefly touches level 1 and 2 in that order, then grasps on to the top rung."
There are some tough challenges here. The amount of power required to have a 120 lb (150 lb w/battery and bumpers) robot 'jump' ~9' is ridiculous and extremely dangerous. The skill level required to do this and touch the levels and then grasp the top row is outrageously difficult. You're much better off just grabbing the bottom row and picking up an easy 10 points.
Is it more realistic and safer if my robot is 60 lbs including battery and bumper?
Anyways... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6b4ZZQkcNEo
RRLedford
11-01-2013, 23:26
This year's rule limiting horizontal size AT ALL TIMES to staying within a 54" cylinder is very severe in light of the sloping nature of the climbing challenge.
How many people realize that if your robot is a cube of just over 31" on a side, then your diagonal is already at the 54" size limit.
So suppose that during climbing your robot flips around or swings some as it transitioning levels, well you better not have a very tall or wide robot, or you are going to have one of your diagonal dimensions exceed the 54" diameter limit.
We are thinking of having our robot lean over 30 degrees onto the pyramid corner, and establish a contact zone that bridges the dihedral angle, for extra stability as we transition the rungs, especially at the point where robot sits on only one rung while reaching for the next
However, we then realized that this 30 degrees of lean over will SEVERELY limit what our initial footprint can be.
Has your team taken this into consideration?
What is the longest DIAGONAL dimension of your robot going to be, and how will robot movements during climbing cause this dimension to GROW in the horizontal projection of its length?
There are going to be a lot of penalties for teams who overlook this.
I see people talking about deploying gripper arms to swing themselves upward, but I suspect that unless they are very small, they will exceed the 54" horizontal diameter limit.
Many other ideas being described are not taking this factor into consideration.
My own opinion is that with this games design, there should have been some horizontal expansion allowance for robots in contact with the pyramid.
-Dick Ledford
How many people realize that if your robot is a cube of just over 31" on a side, then your diagonal is already at the 54" size limit.
Maybe I'm missing something here... when a 31" cube sits flat on the ground its diagonal dimension in the horizontal plane is ~44". Or are you referring to the fact that when this cube is rotated 45 degrees from the horizontal plane then its diagonal dimension is ~54" horizontally? Depending on your climbing method your robot may not ever rotate to 45 degrees, given that the pyramid is 60/68 degrees based on your approach.
The 54" rule certainly makes the challenge harder but I think a lot of designs could still be done if the mounting location of the climber is changed on the robot frame. Remember that your initial frame doesn't have to stay parallel to the ground while climbing.
April McShorty
12-01-2013, 12:01
We had this amazing idea.. Then became stuck because of real estate
RRLedford
12-01-2013, 18:34
Maybe I'm missing something here... when a 31" cube sits flat on the ground its diagonal dimension in the horizontal plane is ~44". Or are you referring to the fact that when this cube is rotated 45 degrees from the horizontal plane then its diagonal dimension is ~54" horizontally? Depending on your climbing method your robot may not ever rotate to 45 degrees, given that the pyramid is 60/68 degrees based on your approach.
The 54" rule certainly makes the challenge harder but I think a lot of designs could still be done if the mounting location of the climber is changed on the robot frame. Remember that your initial frame doesn't have to stay parallel to the ground while climbing.
I am referring to the cube's diagonal as being the segment going through 2 corners AND the CENTER of the cube, not the FACE diagonal going thru the center of any face.
Yes, if you can maintain proper orientation in the 54" cylinder, this can be handled, but robots tumbling out of controll are going to rack up plenty of technical fouls.
-Dick Ledford
I am referring to the cube's diagonal as being the segment going through 2 corners AND the CENTER of the cube, not the FACE diagonal going thru the center of any face.
That makes more sense, I was looking too literally at how a robot might lean to get on the pyramid.
Robots tipping over are going to generate quite a few penalties this year. 30 point climbs will be huge match swings not only for the amount of points they score but for the penalty points they could cause if failed.
a lot of team doing like robot arm for climbing mechanism
Kevin Sevcik
12-01-2013, 21:02
That makes more sense, I was looking too literally at how a robot might lean to get on the pyramid.
Robots tipping over are going to generate quite a few penalties this year. 30 point climbs will be huge match swings not only for the amount of points they score but for the penalty points they could cause if failed.GDC has a fun definition of "continuously".
Q. How long does a tipped robot have to right itself before it is assessed a TECHNICAL FOUL under G23? Is there anything a tipped robot can do to avoid a TECHNICAL FOUL? Is the TECHNICAL FOUL still assessed if a robot is tipped by the actions of an opposing team?
A. A tipped ROBOT will not be considered "continuously" breaking [G23]. Please see Team UPDATE 2013-01-11 in reference to your final question.
swwrobotics
12-01-2013, 21:21
I don't think my team is capable of doing this, but one idea would be to "somersault" up the edge of the pyramid. I think this could be done pretty quickly and effectively, and I am even placing a bet that some of the top teams will do it. One example would be team 148's mechanism to grab onto the pole, lift itself up, then have a second arm on the other end of the robot grab on, the first arm would let go, the robot would flip using the second arm, and so on: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hTyXQUgYLE
Kevin Sevcik
12-01-2013, 21:41
I don't think my team is capable of doing this, but one idea would be to "somersault" up the edge of the pyramid. I think this could be done pretty quickly and effectively, and I am even placing a bet that some of the top teams will do it. One example would be team 148's mechanism to grab onto the pole, lift itself up, then have a second arm on the other end of the robot grab on, the first arm would let go, the robot would flip using the second arm, and so on: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hTyXQUgYLEI keep seeing this suggestion, and I keep wondering what exactly the plan is after the second bicep curl leaves the robot 4 feet in the air with its wheels facing the pole.
MetalJacket
12-01-2013, 22:04
I keep seeing this suggestion, and I keep wondering what exactly the plan is after the second bicep curl leaves the robot 4 feet in the air with its wheels facing the pole.
Presumably, you'd just grab back on with the first arm again and repeat ( assuming arms with 180 degrees of rotation)
pfreivald
12-01-2013, 22:22
I am referring to the cube's diagonal as being the segment going through 2 corners AND the CENTER of the cube, not the FACE diagonal going thru the center of any face.
Yes, if you can maintain proper orientation in the 54" cylinder, this can be handled, but robots tumbling out of controll are going to rack up plenty of technical fouls.
-Dick Ledford
To get a proper handle on what we were dealing with, we drew out on large, taped-together pieces of paper a 54" circle, a template of our robot frame plus bumpers, and a top-down view of one "zone" of the pyramid corner (post-bottom to knuckle-top).
We had more room than we thought, but less than we might want.
RRLedford
12-01-2013, 23:03
The flipping or "rolling" up the corner edge with alternating short grip arms is how we are prototyping to go up the pyramid. Our style of gripper will not need to squeeze hard or damage the power coated tubes. The angle formed by the intersecting horizontal tubes is how/where we will grip, avoiding the slope tube entirely.
We will be able to grasp next higher level BEFORE releasing from one below. We will not tip or swivel around laterally, because our grasp mechanism will bridge across the two intersecting horizontal tubes, yet avoid contacting the slope tube.
We will not drive; only shoot 2or 3 in autonomous. We may hoist others up, if we can keep hoist near enough to level rungs to have partner(s) bump them on the way up. They may have to extend some to snag our hook, since we can only lower it so much, but even if we only pull them up to the 20 pt. level, that is a nice bonus for a no driving bot to make.
The robot will be kind of vertically notched so it can straddle the corner edge tube at match start, allowing center of mass to be starting nearer to the initial gripping points.
-Dick Ledford
RRLedford
12-01-2013, 23:51
That makes more sense, I was looking too literally at how a robot might lean to get on the pyramid.
Robots tipping over are going to generate quite a few penalties this year. 30 point climbs will be huge match swings not only for the amount of points they score but for the penalty points they could cause if failed.
BTW, I forgot to emphasize that the BUMPERS must ALSO be counted as part of the 54" vertical cylinder diameter limit. This makes it really hard to climb by flipping or rolling, with out extending beyond the limit.
-Dick Ledford
cmrnpizzo14
13-01-2013, 13:49
The flipping or "rolling" up the corner edge with alternating short grip arms is how we are prototyping to go up the pyramid. Our style of gripper will not need to squeeze hard or damage the power coated tubes. The angle formed by the intersecting horizontal tubes is how/where we will grip, avoiding the slope tube entirely.
We will be able to grasp next higher level BEFORE releasing from one below. We will not tip or swivel around laterally, because our grasp mechanism will bridge across the two intersecting horizontal tubes, yet avoid contacting the slope tube.
We will not drive; only shoot 2or 3 in autonomous. We may hoist others up, if we can keep hoist near enough to level rungs to have partner(s) bump them on the way up. They may have to extend some to snag our hook, since we can only lower it so much, but even if we only pull them up to the 20 pt. level, that is a nice bonus for a no driving bot to make.
The robot will be kind of vertically notched so it can straddle the corner edge tube at match start, allowing center of mass to be starting nearer to the initial gripping points.
-Dick Ledford
Sounds like a good strategy, but I would be worried if you cannot drive. You will be valuable for your hanging, hoisting, and auto shooting, but I would wary of picking a robot that essentially leaves my alliance playing 2v3 for most of the match. The points that you score might be enough to offset this, but I will be very interested to see how this strategy pans out for you.
Good luck! I hope that it works!
RRLedford
14-01-2013, 06:59
Sounds like a good strategy, but I would be worried if you cannot drive. You will be valuable for your hanging, hoisting, and auto shooting, but I would wary of picking a robot that essentially leaves my alliance playing 2v3 for most of the match. The points that you score might be enough to offset this, but I will be very interested to see how this strategy pans out for you.
Good luck! I hope that it works!
We certainly had some resistance to this approach from several team members, but the majority favored it.
One big plus is that it is virtually undefendable.
All the other good mobile bots are still subject to defense, which can lower their match scores dramatically, whereas our contribution is more reliable.
We also allow for less queue at the feeders, and less traffic congestion.
The big negative is the 3-on-2 advantage of the opposing alliance.
Still, we could not see ourselves getting ~50 or more points any easier way, and we are still finding more ways to score from on top of the pyramid.
-Dick Ledford
We certainly had some resistance to this approach from several team members, but the majority favored it.
One big plus is that it is virtually undefendable.
All the other good mobile bots are still subject to defense, which can lower their match scores dramatically, whereas our contribution is more reliable.
We also allow for less queue at the feeders, and less traffic congestion.
The big negative is the 3-on-2 advantage of the opposing alliance.
Still, we could not see ourselves getting ~50 or more points any easier way, and we are still finding more ways to score from on top of the pyramid.
-Dick Ledford
Where do you plan to start your robot? What if your alliance partners need you in a different spot? Are there multiple locations you can do autonomous discs and the lift?
enigmatic
14-01-2013, 11:14
We have an idea for a climber that will go up to the third level and then dump four colored discs in. We would score fifty points everytime, but there is resistance from members of the team because 1)we do not have a pyramid to test it on yet, making it difficult to do and 2) they believe we can score more points shooting. The reason for the disconnect is differing beliefs on how accurate shooters are going to be. Those who want a shooter believe at least 75%, but those who want a climber think it will be much lower than this.
We have an idea for a climber that will go up to the third level and then dump four colored discs in. We would score fifty points everytime, but there is resistance from members of the team because 1)we do not have a pyramid to test it on yet, making it difficult to do and 2) they believe we can score more points shooting. The reason for the disconnect is differing beliefs on how accurate shooters are going to be. Those who want a shooter believe at least 75%, but those who want a climber think it will be much lower than this.
I would say that if you're going to design a robot that centers around climbing, I suggest you start asking around local teams if they'll let you use their pyramid for testing. Part of effective strategies for FIRST is building within your resources. Based off of the pleathora of shooters being posted, I believe a 75% stable accuracy would be a very do-able shooter. Combine that with the myriad of safe zones this year, it would come down to how many trips (or lack of trips for floor loading) you can make in a match. The 50pts is a very attractive number, but you have to be dang well sure you're hit that third tier every single time. When you're shooting, each grouping of point runs should be independent of the previous run. With the 50pts, it's an all or nothing run. Also, shooting in Autonomous is the first tie breaker between seeding.
Just my $.02 and some food for thought.
rainbowdash
14-01-2013, 12:29
We were considering grappling hooks and ascending to the sound of elevator music generated by a mini boombox inside our robot XD
Nuttyman54
14-01-2013, 14:17
We were considering grappling hooks and ascending to the sound of elevator music generated by a mini boombox inside our robot XD
I would love to see a robot do the 30pt climb, reach out an arm to do the 20pt dunk, slam the discs into the goal, and then start blasting Slam Jam (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=J9FImc2LOr8#t=22s) out of the robot.
RRLedford
14-01-2013, 15:18
Where do you plan to start your robot? What if your alliance partners need you in a different spot? Are there multiple locations you can do autonomous discs and the lift?
We will start out straddling either far (from goals) outside corner of the pyramid.
We will switch to forward corners if we have issues being consistnet with accuracy of our 3 autonomous shots.
-Dick Ledford
JamesCH95
14-01-2013, 15:23
I would love to see a robot do the 30pt climb, reach out an arm to do the 20pt dunk, slam the discs into the goal, and then start blasting Slam Jam (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=J9FImc2LOr8#t=22s) out of the robot.
challenge-accepted.jpg
xXdarkwolfXx
14-01-2013, 15:48
maybe if you had a bot push another with some rolling bot to lv 1 then the bot on lv one pull a bot with some claw device and the bot being pull on with grip on to the thrid bot with claw etc then with some rolling divice on one of the corners all 3 with 1 or 2 of them rolling can go up the corner of the pyramid not all with goto lv 3 but it would stil be points (only a idea ) :yikes:
Don Wright
14-01-2013, 15:56
maybe if you had a bot push another with some rolling bot to lv 1 then the bot on lv one pull a bot with some claw device and the bot being pull on with grip on to the thrid bot with claw etc then with some rolling divice on one of the corners all 3 with 1 or 2 of them rolling can go up the corner of the pyramid not all with goto lv 3 but it would stil be points (only a idea ) :yikes:
I appreciate your enthusiasm but you might get a better response to your idea if you spend a couple extra minutes properly composing your thoughts into your post. We are, at the core, striving to push the community to a higher level...want to join us??
enigmatic
14-01-2013, 16:29
I would say that if you're going to design a robot that centers around climbing, I suggest you start asking around local teams if they'll let you use their pyramid for testing. Part of effective strategies for FIRST is building within your resources. Based off of the pleathora of shooters being posted, I believe a 75% stable accuracy would be a very do-able shooter. Combine that with the myriad of safe zones this year, it would come down to how many trips (or lack of trips for floor loading) you can make in a match. The 50pts is a very attractive number, but you have to be dang well sure you're hit that third tier every single time. When you're shooting, each grouping of point runs should be independent of the previous run. With the 50pts, it's an all or nothing run. Also, shooting in Autonomous is the first tie breaker between seeding.
Just my $.02 and some food for thought.
We are using pyramids of local teams, but they are around a half hour drive away from our building site. The idea we have would be reliable and if there was a team that focused on not allowing us to obtain the four colored discs, we could at least get 30 points. The way our shooter is designed, it would be easily blocked by a robot that can still go under the pyramid. It isn't making a shooter that is accurate that is the problem, it is making one that shoots quickly and accurately in the context of the game.
I would love to see a robot do the 30pt climb, reach out an arm to do the 20pt dunk, slam the discs into the goal, and then start blasting Slam Jam (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=J9FImc2LOr8#t=22s) out of the robot.
Our team has had a long running joke of building a "Rave"-bot for competition.
You've made my day.
And of course:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/img/20c/20cb3b0a0fb089b4e746c4ecae7da9c9_m.jpg
Our team has had a long running joke of building a "Rave"-bot for competition.
You've made my day.
And of course:
IMAGE REDACTED[/IMG]
Of course, and before going to Ramp Riot, where we brought an off-season project robot, our auton was set to spin in circles and play Gangnam Style from the driverstation while flashing LEDs :)
Unfortunately we had to change it to actually do something, though :(
cmrnpizzo14
14-01-2013, 19:43
We have an idea for a climber that will go up to the third level and then dump four colored discs in. We would score fifty points everytime, but there is resistance from members of the team because 1)we do not have a pyramid to test it on yet, making it difficult to do and 2) they believe we can score more points shooting. The reason for the disconnect is differing beliefs on how accurate shooters are going to be. Those who want a shooter believe at least 75%, but those who want a climber think it will be much lower than this.
Solid idea, don't forget to consider using one mechanism for multiple tasks. For example, you would make your alliance value much higher if you used your frisbee dumper to score 3 frisbees in the low goal during auto and continuing to score there or play defense during the game.
That would help offset the some of the negatives that come with this robot idea...
Originally Posted by RRLedford
The flipping or "rolling" up the corner edge with alternating short grip arms is how we are prototyping to go up the pyramid. Our style of gripper will not need to squeeze hard or damage the power coated tubes. The angle formed by the intersecting horizontal tubes is how/where we will grip, avoiding the slope tube entirely.
We will not drive; only shoot 2or 3 in autonomous. We may hoist others up, if we can keep hoist near enough to level rungs to have partner(s) bump them on the way up. They may have to extend some to snag our hook, since we can only lower it so much, but even if we only pull them up to the 20 pt. level, that is a nice bonus for a no driving bot to make.
-Dick Ledford
good luck to both teams, I would certainly consider either of your robots for my alliance!
thmeans06
15-01-2013, 13:18
A lot of you guys are mentioning the 54" cylinder, which is great. However, don't forget about the max frame perimeter of 112"! A 30" square bot would be at 120"!
enigmatic
15-01-2013, 14:04
Solid idea, don't forget to consider using one mechanism for multiple tasks. For example, you would make your alliance value much higher if you used your frisbee dumper to score 3 frisbees in the low goal during auto and continuing to score there or play defense during the game.
That would help offset the some of the negatives that come with this robot idea...
good luck to both teams, I would certainly consider either of your robots for my alliance!
We would potentially be able to shoot two in during auton, but that is about it. We would make sure to climb the pyramid early so as to make sure that we have time to gt up, otherwise we lose all of our points. So depending on how quickly we will be able to make it up, we might not play much defense.
=Martin=Taylor=
15-01-2013, 14:38
We will be able to grasp next higher level BEFORE releasing from one below. We will not tip or swivel around laterally, because our grasp mechanism will bridge across the two intersecting horizontal tubes, yet avoid contacting the slope tube.
....
The robot will be kind of vertically notched so it can straddle the corner edge tube at match start, allowing center of mass to be starting nearer to the initial gripping points.
-Dick Ledford
Now add to that a wheel which extends underneath the robot to prop it against the bar while reaching for the next level and we are considering the same design. We've even prototyped a mechanism which successfully climbed the pyramid unweighted. Trying to fit it into the cylinder is proving to be very difficult. If used, the enormity of the mechanism will force us to sacrifice a lot of our disc-shooter-goal scoring ability, which some of our team is strongly against.
When you start to CAD these designs one thing becomes apparent: either you focus on the climb, or you focus on the discs. Doing both well: nearly impossible.
Personally, I really like the 50 pt climb and dump strategy.
The advantage in my mind is that it allows you to score all of your points really fast and lets your team focus on perfecting a repeatable task.
If you're robot is only designed to climb and dump, you can spend the rest of the match playing defense. Essentially, you are forcing the other alliance to score 50+ pts under heavy D.... or.... beat you up the pyramid (which is unlikely if you have optimized your robot for this strategy).
If you focus on scoring discs. You need to be better at scoring discs than anyone else to win. There will be lots of bots scoring discs and you will need to outscore them. Very few will attempt the 50 pt strategy.
enigmatic
16-01-2013, 10:24
If used, the enormity of the mechanism will force us to sacrifice a lot of our disc-shooter-goal scoring ability, which some of our team is strongly against.
When you start to CAD these designs one thing becomes apparent: either you focus on the climb, or you focus on the discs. Doing both well: nearly impossible.
Personally, I really like the 50 pt climb and dump strategy.
The advantage in my mind is that it allows you to score all of your points really fast and lets your team focus on perfecting a repeatable task.
If you're robot is only designed to climb and dump, you can spend the rest of the match playing defense. Essentially, you are forcing the other alliance to score 50+ pts under heavy D.... or.... beat you up the pyramid (which is unlikely if you have optimized your robot for this strategy).
If you focus on scoring discs. You need to be better at scoring discs than anyone else to win. There will be lots of bots scoring discs and you will need to outscore them. Very few will attempt the 50 pt strategy.[/QUOTE]
My thoughts exactly. We have others on our team who do not like the idea though.
Now add to that a wheel which extends underneath the robot to prop it against the bar while reaching for the next level and we are considering the same design. We've even prototyped a mechanism which successfully climbed the pyramid unweighted. Trying to fit it into the cylinder is proving to be very difficult. If used, the enormity of the mechanism will force us to sacrifice a lot of our disc-shooter-goal scoring ability, which some of our team is strongly against.
When you start to CAD these designs one thing becomes apparent: either you focus on the climb, or you focus on the discs. Doing both well: nearly impossible.
Personally, I really like the 50 pt climb and dump strategy.
~snip~
Very few will attempt the 50 pt strategy.
What makes you say that?
JOClarke
01-04-2013, 06:45
I know this thread has been dormant for a while, but Sparky is trying to lighten our bot with switching our super shifter climbing mechanism to a tough box 3 stage. Does anybody have experience with this transmission? We are at a fork in the road try this and find the bugs or lighten the super shifter. Video of us climbing at the shop: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8iIy2wpKyU&feature=youtu.be
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.