Re: Why didn't we think of that?
 

We did a variant on this, using a robot battery, appropriate connectors on the battery and motor side, and a drill handle. Here's the build video our mechanical and electrical captain, Izzy, made. That runs for quite a while, since you're not using a drill battery.

I really wish I'd thought of flashlight aiming and passive bridge manipulators.

Re: Why didn't we think of that?
 

Us (25) and SPAM were the Flashlight alliance! haha And yes, the flashlight/headlight would paint a bright beam (or spot in SPAM's case) on the backboard and we both used these lights quite effectively to line up our shooters. The incredibly bright beams (We used a 100 watt halogen headlight and spam a modified maglite flashlight), combined with the reflective tape on the backboards, made it a very viable and effective strategy.

Re: Why didn't we think of that?
 

Not necessarily over the bumper but a drop down intake would have been nice. The "CD7" intake in particular was really cool. I'd consider designing it in such a way that it was motorized rather than pneumatic and could go far enough down to push the bridge as well. It'd take some development and thought.

The bridge arm 2791 used worked but was just barely strong enough and didn't work nearly as effectively as a wedge manipulator. I wish we went the simple route on that one.

Re: Why didn't we think of that?
 

Thanks! Our team didn't have vision tracking working this season so we did a manual line up with a yellow flagpole mounted on the robot. Ingenious idea using a flashlight to light up the target!

Re: Why didn't we think of that?
 

I think 2084 was the only team with a slanted elevator. (Although we did have a very different take on "ball elevator" than most teams.)

Re: Why didn't we think of that?
 

Andy Baker is literally a pro on this topic, see some of his presentations on the FIRST site, CD-Media, and Andymark.

The history of FRC Design is my favorite presentation.

Re: Why didn't we think of that?
 

I started a thread on this a while back, but it seems that every year, there is a feature/design that is missed by the vast majority of teams.

In 2012 they were:

• Drop Down Intake
• Stinger
• Traction on the bridge

In 2011 they were:

• Minibot pre-deployment/ramp
• Taking the gearboxes off of the minibot
• Roller claws or other active tube acquisition device

In 2010 they were:

• Tunnel traversing
• Hanging off the side of the tower
• Active ball possession device

Re: Why didn't we think of that?
 

We worked very closely with our friends on team 103 this year. As a programmer, I worked a lot on their robot as well as ours and they actually had the camera on it for vision tracking (though that particular bit of programming was done by Bharat Nain). Their drive coach also really liked being able to see the camera feed during the match. We considered implementing it on ours after a rough showing in Orlando, but decided not to after our first few matches at Lenape (our first event with the headlight) went well.

It was really awesome to be paired up with SPAM at Championships as that design decision completely turned around our season and was a huge factor in use even qualifying for CMP this year (of course, we also could not have done it without our excellent alliance partners at Mt. Olive and MAR Champs).

Back on topic:

In 2009, we sort of missed the mark with our robot design. We had a shooter that could only shoot one ball at a time. It was accurate, but we just could not compete with all the dumper bots who would score 10 balls in 2 seconds.

Re: Why didn't we think of that?
 

I've recently started paying attention to other teams on a more national scale, and I realized that not all teams use the Anderson Powerpole connectors. It just blew my mind how such high level teams could compete without using them. I'm used to them because my team has used them ever since I joined. I guess I just took for granted that most teams use them, seeing how helpful they are. I recommend them to any team who wants to make their electronics so much easier.

link:
http://www.powerwerx.com/anderson-po...owerpole-sets/

Re: Why didn't we think of that?
 

Can you explain how this works? Were you looking through the driver station feed or at the backboard itself? (the latter seems difficult to me with the nature of the retro-reflective tape)

Re: Why didn't we think of that?
 

We had no camera on our robot and did not rely on the retro-reflective tape (though it did help increase visibility). Our headlight projected a vertical beam of light that our driver used to visually align the robot with the goal using the light's reflection off of the backboard itself.

Re: Why didn't we think of that?
 

In 2011, the opening dual roller claw was the real deal. Rotation allowed teams to deliver tubes no matter what orientation they were acquired with, and the opening allowed them to drop tubes onto the pegs.

In 2010, 469 took the cake with their redirector; quick hangers, especially 67's passive one, were also arguably the best ones.

From what I've seen/heard, 2009 was the year where rapid ball dispensing, as opposed to a turret, was the better option.

Re: Why didn't we think of that?
 

braking system for 2012 so that double balancing a robot turns into a single balance. Also for Co-op bridge, there is a guaranteed 1 point for both robots being supported by the bridge after play stops. Check out 3173's robot who used this very successfully at the championships and I believe that 108 also used it.

Re: Why didn't we think of that?
 

For 2012, it would have to be over the bumper intake. It may have come up once or twice as a comment during a discussion, but we never really looked at it.

I spent about an hour playing with under the bumper intake though.

Re: Why didn't we think of that?
 

548 finally got one these this year and there's one reason why. Speed... What is the fastest way I can accomplish this task. This takes care of the 2009 dump, 2010 side hang, 2011 jaw (opening roller claw), and the 2012 over the bumper pickup. Asking not only how best to do something but how fast should help more teams figure out these little things that most people seem to miss.