Chief Delphi
Page 2 of 2 < 1 2
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   General Forum (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Quadruple Balance on Bridge (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=105202)

stundt1 29-03-2012 20:41
Re: Quadruple Balance on Bridge
 
Im wondering what if you got a couple small robots like the robo wizards robot?

dellagd 29-03-2012 21:10
Re: Quadruple Balance on Bridge
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH (Post 1151310)
Actually... They do just meet the specifications. However, they set their robot specifications higher than FIRST does.

In the real world, I need to meet or beat specs. But, at the same time, I might be the one setting some of the specs based on what the customer wants. If the customer says, "I want up to three robots on this place" and that place is big enough for three and not four (and barely big enough for three at that), then if I design for 4, 5, or 6 robots, I may be able to meet the customer's specification--but it's not a good solution, because it's outside the customer's needs/wants, and the time I spend engineering that solution can be better spent for other things, like putting as many basketballs as possible into a hoop 10' high, which the customer also wants.
Very well said :D

philso 30-03-2012 01:59
Re: Quadruple Balance on Bridge
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH (Post 1151310)
Actually... They do just meet the specifications. However, they set their robot specifications higher than FIRST does.

In the real world, I need to meet or beat specs. But, at the same time, I might be the one setting some of the specs based on what the customer wants. If the customer says, "I want up to three robots on this place" and that place is big enough for three and not four (and barely big enough for three at that), then if I design for 4, 5, or 6 robots, I may be able to meet the customer's specification--but it's not a good solution, because it's outside the customer's needs/wants, and the time I spend engineering that solution can be better spent for other things, like putting as many basketballs as possible into a hoop 10' high, which the customer also wants.
You are totally correct if the objective is to "deliver a product". People are not discussing this because balancing more than three robots on a bridge gives an advantage in this year's game. They are discussing this to explore what is possible.

Matthx 30-03-2012 02:14
Re: Quadruple Balance on Bridge
 
Since kickoff I've been joking about how if two alliances manage to hexabalance on the co-op bridge, they should both automatically go to St. Louis.

On a slightly more realistic (but still very ridiculous) note, ever since I saw that picture of a ball pyramid on the red alliance bridge I've thought a beyond-triple balance would be a cool closing ceremony/intermission entertainment type thing. Maybe utilize some hanging robots from 2010 for extra win.

Also, posted at 11:14 :P

EricH 30-03-2012 10:02
Re: Quadruple Balance on Bridge
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by philso (Post 1151473)
You are totally correct if the objective is to "deliver a product". People are not discussing this because balancing more than three robots on a bridge gives an advantage in this year's game. They are discussing this to explore what is possible.
Which is part of my point: Because these robots are designed for 3 on a bridge at most, due to the GDC's "product requirements", getting more than 3 is going to be very difficult. Not impossible, but extremely difficult. I can think of 3 "special hangers" (118, 179, and one other team whose number I can't remember that hangs most of their robot off the side of the bridge) and 2 "stackers" who can create a stack. That's 6 (one on top of both stackers) with room for one more. But to get that balance is going to take the entire available match time--stack the stackers, put two other teams on, and have the other robots lock on, and then fine-tune until balanced.

MAYBE on a Championship practice field... or IRI practice field. But with it not being worth it, not in any match, and with the risk of something going on, probably not until after the season is over.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 00:23.
Page 2 of 2 < 1 2
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi