Intake systems
 

Hello CD community!
We've all seen threads about shooters, drive systems, bridge manipulators etc., but we haven't seen a post-season thread about intake systems.

So I ask you, what is the fastest\most efficient\simplest\most interesting\all of the above intake system you saw this season?

By the way, I must admit starting this thread isn't solely to please my curiosity and create a discussion, but also because we... umm... well, kinda need to build a new intake system soon and looking for inspiration :rolleyes:

Re: Intake systems
 

My personal fave is from back in 2002.

Re: Intake systems
 

I will say the best I saw was the over-the-bumper, full robot-width, using poly cord and rollers to funnel into a hopper style. It was simple, fast and efficient. There's another thread on best-of for Rebound Rumble here.

Re: Intake systems
 

My personal opinions:
Fastest: 469
Most Efficient: 2056/2826
Simplest: 987
Most Interesting: 67

I recognize that there are other outstanding robots that used similar systems to the ones I've mentioned, these are just meant to be examples that I'm familiar with.

Re: Intake systems
 

Could you show some examples of these robots, like I have only caught glimpses of 2056, 469 and 2826

Re: Intake systems
 

http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=FRC+469+videos

;)

This one is especially good for viewing the intake: http://vimeo.com/39918306

Re: Intake systems
 

Here is one of us 2826 at Championships

Here is another

Re: Intake systems
 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8f3hqibAho

987's intake system (starting around 1:20)...

Re: Intake systems
 

http://2056.ca/robot/general-lee

There's one of 2056, with an intake similar to 2826 (which is why I grouped them together. Also, 67's arm can be seen in the video Ike posted featuring 469.

Re: Intake systems
 

I just love that intake.

-Clinton-

Re: Intake systems
 

There were a few different teams that had drop down intakes. 177 and 973 had identical intakes. This is a video of 177 at CT Regional, even though we didn't shoot much (due to sticky new balls for elims) it gives you a good view of the intake rollers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9IZn...feature=relmfu

One problem with our roller system was that The first stage (lower tower and intake) could not handle 2+ balls at once, it would jam the roller system. But it was useful for getting balls from under the bridge and in corners.

I will upload a video tonight and link it here of our roller system up close.

I also believe that 33 had a roller system close to this, but it was concealed under their utility arm.

Re: Intake systems
 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJREahxuy4Q&feature=plcp

Great video that shows their intake.

-Clinton-

Re: Intake systems
 

While I think that this is the general tone I don’t think anyone has actually come out and said it:

Golden Rules of Collecting:
1. The faster the better. (Overkill after you get past 2x robot top speed.)
2. The wider/more tolerance the better. (Less driver precision = faster ball collecting)

By the way, those rules apply to every game – even when you can only pick up one piece at a time. Always keep in mind you have to pick it up before you can score it.

Regards, Bryan

Re: Intake systems
 

I definitely think the coolest was 67's. I was a amazed at how awesome it was.

However, I think one of the most functional ones might be 341's. They could grab balls from the co-op bridge like no other team I saw could. This allowed them to put up huge auton scores. They were intimidating because of this- I can remember standing at the driver's station in Boston looking at 341 and 233's beautiful robots, and then looking to my blue alliance side- 2 fenderbots and a defensebot. It was scary to think by the end of the first 15 seconds we'd be long gone.

Re: Intake systems
 

In addition to all of the really good intakes that have been mentioned, I think there is something to be said for Team 95's collector in 2002. Its throughput is quite impressive.

Re: Intake systems
 

I found 842's intake to be very effective:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-2vE...0&feature=plcp

Re: Intake systems
 

48's intake wasn't wide at all (alas, it definitely held us back), but the double-sided intake conveyor was plenty fast enough. It was driven by a single RS-550 / 26:1 Banebots P60 combo. I'm still amazed that single motor/gearbox could drive that many polycord belts/rollers so efficiently (upper arm conveyor, figure 8 to lower arm conveyor, lower arm conveyor, and vertical conveyor down into the robot base).

For those not familiar, our 2012 robot's ball intake cage and shooter were part of a pivoting arm. Please see the attached picture.

Our original ball loading position was the arm tilted back to the vertical hard stop (aluminum angle piece with the black velcro rectangle in the pic). After collecting, we would then lower the arm to shooting position. We felt we could do better. We intended to find a solution to let us collect balls in teleop while leaving the arm in the usual front key shot angle, 48 degrees above horizontal (we planned the angle command to work out that way...surrrre).

The challenge to achieving this functionality was that whenever the arm was lowered to shooting positions, a significant air gap appeared between the upper ball conveyor and the motorized intake roller mounted in the robot base. This intake roller was mounted just underneath the hard stop and was necessarily independent from the conveyor belting system due to the changing angle of the arm. Without any improvements, balls being collected inward and upward by the intake roller and the vertical polycord belting could not reach the arm cage when the arm was in a shooting position. So how to bridge this gap?

Originally, we envisioned adding some kind of sliding curved lexan piece between the hard stop (fixed end) and the arm's upper conveyor frame (sliding end) to help divert the balls into the arm's conveyor cage. Ultimately, we found something much lighter and simpler worked great - a quarter-slice of blue (must be blue!) pool noodle velcroed to the vertical hard stop. You can see the strip of blue noodle peeking out on the far side of the stop.

As balls were pushed upward, the pool noodle deflected the path of each ball forward enough to get it to pop into the conveyor cage at any shooting angle we typically used. A simple, lightweight solution that provided a very important piece of additional functionality.

tl;dr - the addition of blue pool noodle backed by Velcro transforms any old fixed-length polycord conveyor system into a "virtual" variable-length system. :)

Re: Intake systems
 

Here is a video of team 177 at Beantown Blitz. Skip to 3:00 for the action, it is video from a helmet camera on the robot. There are a few points where it's effectiveness are shown, such as getting balls that are dangerously close to the opposite alliance bridge and in corners.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ce46-ydnY80

Re: Intake systems
 

I'd say one of the most important parts of collector design is making it simple and easy for the driver. In Rebound Rumble, the ideal collector allows the driver to touch a ball with that part of the robot, and then next thing they know, the ball is in the robot ready to shoot.

Ideally, the collector opening should be large, so the driver has a nice big, easy target. Also, when designing the intake there should be some consideration for the range of angles the driver can take to pick up a ball. For example, a 973/177/1477/2415 intake (118 had one too that I got to see, but they had to scrap it for weight) has a large angle that balls can be picked up from, since it can intake from the sides. This way the driver doesn't have to drive head on to pick up a ball, just basically touch it with a roller on any side.

It is interesting to use 1477 as an example here, because they didn't have their final intake for their first two regionals. For Alamo and Bayou, they used what was basically a large funnel with belts/rollers going up it. They had problems with this intake having a small angle of entry for balls, or else they would jam against the sides of the intake. The driver had to drive head on at balls, and line them up close to the center of the funnel. You could see that they were shooting much more rapidly and collecting many more balls by Championships and could even see a decent improvement at Lone Star, though they didn't win there.

Another trend among the more successful teams this year was an over-the-bumper intake. This had the largest impact for long robots, as they were no longer limited to the small gap allowed by the bumper rules, but instead close to the entire short side of the robot. Something that many designers didn't foresee, but I'm sure most drivers noticed, is that balls tend to get stuck against the walls, and they're hard to get when your bumpers are in the way. A through-the-bumper intake can't get the "edge" of the intake roller as close to a ball on the side of the field as an over-the-bumper can. This problem was also very apparent in 2010.

Re: Intake systems
 

While area is important, it counts in some places more than others. Many teams recognized that it is important to have as much area available as possible for picking up balls, but for some reason didn't think up an over the bumper intake. Some of those teams (like mine) chose a two sided through-the bumper intake (see 256).

What we all found is that when it came time to play at regionals, some area is worth more than others. Big movements, like turning the robot 180 degrees to pick up a ball, are far less difficult than the fine positioning needed to get a ball into a through-the-bumper intake. Although teams like 256 had more perimeter dedicated to picking up compared to, say, 254, but not as much contiguous area. That's what count's for drivers.