Over the bump or under the tower [Archive]

kgzak

12-01-2010, 07:29

i would have to go with going over the bump because making a robot that can go through the tunnel really limits what space you have. Going over the bump also gives you more freedom as to were you can cross sections. It's also harder to block people going over the bump.

Josh Drake

12-01-2010, 07:32

What about both, or for arguments sake, neither?:)

quinxorin

12-01-2010, 07:42

Well it would possible to both go over the bump and go under the tower, or do neither, but personally I think that if you build it with the height limitation of the tunnel then it would be pointless to go over the bump, and if you dedicate the time to build a drive train to go over the bump then it would be pointlesss to limit your height. As for doing neither, it seems like a very bad choice to limit your robot in that way.

thefro526

12-01-2010, 08:04

BrendanB

12-01-2010, 08:49

Over the bump. Especially with 2 inches of clearance if you make a robot 28 inches wide and with bumpers attached, that will be a pain to get through especially when coming back towards you.

scottydoh

12-01-2010, 08:52

My vote would have to be neither also, but since that wasn't an option I voted over. I like the analogy that someone made to foosball. I think that the best strategy is if everyone stays in their aisle and just fowards the ball to the next section. But, I do agree that it is a good idea to have the flexability to cross the border in an emergency situation. 810 will certianly not be trying to cross the bump, but the option will definitely be there. ;)

the man

12-01-2010, 08:58

We are planing on going under the tower but use the bump as a second option.
I dont think the height restriction of the tunnel is to bad. It you go over the bump your going to want a low center of gravity which limits your height or at least where your weight is at.

yodameister

12-01-2010, 08:59

My personal suggestion to you is, Design the Robot to go over the Bumps. The tunnel is easily blocked.

I have a Personal Motto when It comes to decisions like this:

It's Always Better To Be Able to Do something and Not Have to, than to Have to Do Something And Not Be able to.

Then based on your quote, you should design to do both as there may be times when you want/need to go through the tunnel. :)

Daniel_LaFleur

12-01-2010, 09:09

I can see being able to retrieve a ball that is in the tunnel as important.

The Kickoff showed how easily a ball can (and will) roll under there.

yodameister

12-01-2010, 09:14

I can see being able to retrieve a ball that is in the tunnel as important.

The Kickoff showed how easily a ball can (and will) roll under there.
That was my thought as well

Taylor

12-01-2010, 09:20

Do a cost/benefit analysis of going over the bump vs. going under the tower. Having a clear and objective reason to pursue one or the other, balanced with your team's resources and abilities, will help your team decide on a system that matches your overall design.
Having said that, and having done that with our team, we're bumping, and according to the poll it looks like most others are as well.
However, don't base your decisions on what is most popular. As JVN said (paraphrased), the cool factor doesn't win competitions.

KrakatoaCoo

12-01-2010, 09:25

i'd use over bump as most teams would block the tunnels but having both on your robot gives an advantage

Chris is me

12-01-2010, 09:36

I think if your strategy revolves around crossing the zones, strictly going under the tower won't cut it. That's too easy to defend.

JesseK

12-01-2010, 09:49

Over the bumps. Conquer them like they're flat!

wilsonmw04

12-01-2010, 10:10

The best answer is both. I don't see the tower and the bumps as being mutually exclusive.

thefro526

12-01-2010, 10:42

Then based on your quote, you should design to do both as there may be times when you want/need to go through the tunnel. :)

That's what I originally intended to mean, I guessed I assumed that the OP would've also kept in the feature to go under the tunnel.

You know what they say about assuming things.... :D

Donut

12-01-2010, 11:01

We're strongly considering both, but I voted the tunnel option just so the battle looks a little less lopsided for this poll :p

I do not believe these options are mutually exclusive and as mentioned because of the ease in blocking tunnels it is almost a necessity that a tunnel bot can climb the bump as well. That said consider that defense played on you while crossing the bump may actually be worse, since an opponent hitting you as you come over is likely to cause a flip, the only advantage is that the bump provides much more room to try to avoid them on the other side.

The tunnel is a good option for simplicity (though keeping a robot under 17" provides its own challenge) and it is significantly easier to move balls through the tunnel than the bump. Defense is easier to play on the platform but from a blocking position the opposing robot (depending on the zone) can do little other than continue to block (center field probably provides the worst shot to either goal in an alliance's home zone, and in the opponent's zone you can't defend many shots from the center either). Although easier I'm not convinced that blocking the tunnel will be very high on any alliance's priority list unless your robot can single-handedly outscore their entire alliance given the chance.

Chris is me

12-01-2010, 11:23

Something to consider also is a robot low enough for the tunnel is a robot probably with a low enough CoG for the bump.

czeke

12-01-2010, 11:45

Our team, after thinking about it, for a long time, came to the conclusion that the tunnel is a death trap. At any time an opposition robot can block
the entrance, block and/or jam itself in the inside, or you yourself could be trapped inside by opposition robots at both entrances. We'll be opting to figure out how best to cross over the bump.

midway78224

12-01-2010, 11:47

Our team is going with going over the bump with the strategy we want to pull off. Its not possible to go under our mechanism wont work or fold far enough.

CaptainMorton

12-01-2010, 11:53

i dont think you need to necessarily go with either choice unless you are starting in the farthest position.

all you need to do is feed balls to your players in other areas and get to the tower in the end

but then again, its all up to the strategy that you choose to follow

Liu_yiang

13-01-2010, 19:44

While going through the tunnel may be faster, it is prone to blocking and any attempt at hanging is very very hard. Not to mention tunnels put even more size restrictions than the restrictions themselves.

TheWhiteReaper

13-01-2010, 20:41

jgannon

13-01-2010, 21:10

For those designing to go under the tunnel, how are you dealing with the consequent visibility issues?

you yourself could be trapped inside by opposition robots at both entrances
Is that actually a bad thing? If your opponents use two robots to shut down one, the rest of your alliance has a whole lot of field to work with.

quinxorin

13-01-2010, 22:18

Thank you. Our team has decided that "Over the hills" is a much better way to reach Grandmother's house than to go "through the woods."

I hope that this thread helps other teams make thier decisions as well. A bit of information: based on our calculations assuming 6" wheels spread pretty much the farthest they could be, the CoG, if in the center, can be up to 36" high.

p.s. We also decided to go with a mecanum drive, just in case you were interested.

Who?

13-01-2010, 22:29

I would like the community's oppinion on whether a robot should go over the bump or under the tower. My team is almost completeley split between the two options.

build a bot that can do both, because when you want to go over the bump you will have to account for center of gravity, a 45 degree angle is quite a steep one, today we built a mock up robot out of 2x4s with 120lbs. on it and found that it is in fact very easy to tip over, so when you built a robot to go over you will have to keep the center of gravity low and might as well just make it short enough to go under as well.

Krisple

13-01-2010, 22:46

We came up with a little list at 1712, which is by no means complete, but i thought would be nice to share.

over
pro
quick
can't be blocked
con
robot gets damaged
risk of flipping if center of gravity isn't low
can't control ball over

under
pro
can control balls well
low risk of damage
con
takes a while to line up to go under
can easily be blocked
risk of balls falling on you and getting stuck
restricts robot size

We decided to go with over as the initial strategy, but in order to get a low center of gravity we ended up building a chassis that could also fit under if we needed to. Kinda funny how things work out sometimes.

I thought both was the best strategy, but would pick over if I had to pick just one.

Alexis Howell

13-01-2010, 22:49

I'd say neither as well. I mean, why would you really need to traverse? Two robots aren't allowed in the opposing area and it seems that you'd probably need a robot manning all sections...

Traversing would probably only be necessary in a worst case scenario...

killerofkiller

13-01-2010, 23:50

reminds me of the 2003 Stack Attack debate."Over the Ramp,or under the bar?"

DanDon

14-01-2010, 09:12

reminds me of the 2003 Stack Attack debate."Over the Ramp,or under the bar?"

In that case, it was definitely "under the bar." :yikes:

thefro526

14-01-2010, 09:23

Now that 816 has done a bit more thought on the subject, we're going forward with the intent of crossing the bump in every match. Not because we'd like to, but we feel like we're going to need to.

Because of this, we're designing our machine to be able to cross the bumps with minimal problems, and 50% of driver training this year is going to focus on conquering the bump. Our Drivers are going to need to be able to cross the bump with a minimum of a 98% success rate to make the cut this year - I'm not kidding. (98% is derived from 1 failure in 50 crossings, with 50 crossings being derived from 5-6 crossings per match in 8-10 matches)

Hito Seika

14-01-2010, 10:12

I think a Properly made 6 wheel bot will be able to do both. I think...

Nemo

14-01-2010, 12:42

My team is deciding that we don't WANT to go over bumps but if we HAVE to (in the event of an allied robot being disabled) you should BE ABLE TO. Our drive train will allow us to go over but we will ONLY if we have to.

Our team came to a similar conclusion. Also, if you plan to hang at the end, and you start in the zone not adjacent to the tower, you will have to cross a bump before hanging.

GODUX123

14-01-2010, 19:37

We're tying to do both

Puffin

14-01-2010, 21:49

Bump is a better idea because it is faster to get across since you don't need to line up with the tunnel, but it's also riskier. Also, I doubt there will be a problem with getting blocked in the tunnel. It would take too much effort for an opponent to see that you are trying to go under the tunnel, then block you. Also, that robot won't be doing anything other than just sitting there and blocking, while you can do other things while you are being blocked such as scoring.

falconmaster

17-01-2010, 00:56

Call us crazy.....but we feel that if you need to cross the bumps then you are loosing the game. If each robot is doing its thing in their own zone, you don't need to leave it. We hear that many teams feel that the tunnels are easy to block, so what if they are. If the opposing team is blocking a tunnel then they leave another function in their zone open. We feel that you need to think of this game more like soccer and less of an engineering problem. You play position unless you see an opening then you can take the risk of leaving your position. We could be totally wrong, but we feel that the losses due to engineering a bot to go over costs in other capabilities of the robot....I guess we will see. We also see stopping a robot going over a bump as a fairly easy task. If you move your own robot so they can't complete going over and then move your own robot when they are pressing up against yours can possibly make them loose balance and then fall or tip. The key to wining soccer is a good midfield that can feed the balls to the striker!

ThirteenOfTwo

18-01-2010, 01:37

OK. #1: Bump is clearly a better idea, because it presents less mechanical limitations and you can't get blocked. Also, if you're building a striker bot, you actually have to go over the bump during the finale period if you want to hang, because if you so much as touch the tunnel walls you get a penalty. In any event, blocking the tunnel is as easy as moving about ten feet, whereas blocking the bumps is both dangerous and nearly impossible. If you build your robot carefully and have a good driver, you should not flip.

Second, I disagree with the idea that having one robot in all zones is always the best. In the qualifying rounds, playing defense and winning 10-0 is worse than not playing it and losing 11-10. Defense is totally out of the question in quals, because you want matches to be as high scoring as possible. As falconmaster said, having a good midfield is important. I predict that in the qualifiers, having two bots in midfield and one striker will be a better strategy than 1-1-1. Elimination is a totally different game, though, and in there you want to play defense.

Also, falconmaster, keep in mind that your blocking strategy won't work because A) intentional flipping is illegal B) there's always a faster, holonomic bot C) like you said, a bot on defense in midfield isn't doing its job and D) even if you do block them, and they flip, they land on you, probably incapacitating you as much as them.

lenny8

18-01-2010, 01:56

i think since we are going to have first year drivers going over the bump is the best option. going in the tunnel is too precise and also limits what one can do this year also don't think the tunnel blocking is a problem since with a small robot u have better capabilities to create a little bulldozer. :p

=Martin=Taylor=

18-01-2010, 02:07

Our design mentality went something like this:

1: We want to hang.
2: Its easier to reach a 7' bar when you're 5' tall than when you're only 18" tall.
3: Build a tall robot and climb the bumps.

Chris is me

18-01-2010, 02:15

Another thought to add.

The strategy I believe will work in regional competitions works best with one alliance partner who can move between the field's zones. Not necessarily or always doing so, but at least one alliance partner needs to have the option. The only way to ensure an alliance always has a particular component is to put it on your own robot.

ThirteenOfTwo

18-01-2010, 02:31

@ =Martin=Taylor= : It's easier to fall over with a 5' robot than it is to do so with an 18" robot. :p

=Martin=Taylor=

18-01-2010, 12:11

@ =Martin=Taylor= : It's easier to fall over with a 5' robot than it is to do so with an 18" robot. :p

That’s a rather arbitrary statement. Just because a robot is tall doesn't mean its COG is high.

The top part of the robot can be built very light.

I'f this game turns out to be like 2003, where the actual task is too difficult for most teams to accomplish (controlling and kicking the balls). I foresee low robots, with scoops scoring most of the balls by pushing them under the tunnels.