Chief Delphi

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   Rules/Strategy (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Wheelless Robot? (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=110855)

Donut 11-01-2013 23:56

Re: Wheelless Robot?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by EricH (Post 1211881)
More to the point, can a frame damage the carpet?

It's also not terribly difficult to put some plastic on the bottom of a metal frame using countersunk screws or appropriate adhesive.


To answer the original question: If you have designed your robot to play the game in such a way that you do not need to move, I would say that you have satisfied the rules. (I would like to note that I have seen a wheelless robot take the field before, but it's been several years and a slight rule change on the definition of robot since that happened.)

I haven't seen a wheelless robot myself, but there was that infamous match at Midwest where teams elected not to move and start the match in a 30 point scoring configuration:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/27756

IndySam 12-01-2013 00:08

Re: Wheelless Robot?
 
I saw a team at Western Michigan in AimHigh that didn't have a drive. Their plan was to just sit and shoot. The bot would basically open up to make it easier for the human player to load. Even tho they didn't quite getting working right I thought it was a cool strategy. Just as a note, to this day it's kinda cool to be able to say that we were once so bad that we lost a match to a robot without wheels.

XaulZan11 12-01-2013 00:41

Re: Wheelless Robot?
 
At some of the shallower events, I'd love to take a robot that can *only* get 10 points a match at pick 24.

Ken Streeter 12-01-2013 00:42

Re: Wheelless Robot?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jminer19363 (Post 1211749)
So my team is debating on whether to have wheels or not. In the rules, it says, "The Robot must include all of the basic systems required to be an active participant in the game - power, communications, control, mobility, and actuation."

Does climbing count as mobility or would the lack of wheels be illegal?

Climbing would definitely count as mobility and should result in a legal robot, presuming that you satisfy all other rules.

There is some speculation that the reason for the sentence you quote (in R01) is to keep teams from doing something wildly absurd like claiming that the electronics board is the robot, and that the mobility system (whether for climbing or driving around the field) is just a mechanism that might be added, removed, or swapped in different configurations of the robot as described in R05. ;)

GaryVoshol 12-01-2013 08:40

Re: Wheelless Robot?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by JesseK (Post 1211884)
'No wheels' is a perfectly good way to save weight for a flier. So is the properly-dimensioned 'L' shaped robot -- no bumpers needed on half of the robot, so the weight savings is a big plus. We hadn't thought of such a base until we saw it in Q&A.

Remember that the FRAME PERIMETER is defined by wrapping a string around the robot in the BUMPER ZONE. (Why the GDC doesn't add one word to that definition, "tightly", is beyond me, but that's what they mean; that's the way it's been interpreted ever since the concept was created.) This means your FRAME PERIMETER extends across the space from one leg of the 'L' to the other leg. 8" on each end of that space must support a bumper - how are you going to do that?

jminer19363 16-01-2013 18:11

Re: Wheelless Robot?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tao (Post 1212435)
On topic though, my team was (jokingly)thinking of making a cube that sits there and then climbs. It would be interesting, although you'd have to be able to touch your pyramid so you don't get bumped out of position without consequence.

Our team is seriously considering building a pyramid to climb the pyramid

Whippet 16-01-2013 19:14

Re: Wheelless Robot?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tao (Post 1212435)
We were debating bumpers on an relatively L-shaped robot on a different thread: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=110770
Any more interpretation on the 'no bumpers needed' comment with regards to the posts on the thread?

On topic though, my team was (jokingly)thinking of making a cube that sits there and then climbs. It would be interesting, although you'd have to be able to touch your pyramid so you don't get bumped out of position without consequence.

According to this diagram from the game manual:

I think it would be safe to say that you do not need bumpers on the inside corners of an L-shaped robot.

Chris is me 16-01-2013 19:17

Re: Wheelless Robot?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Whippet (Post 1216821)
I think it would be safe to say that you do not need bumpers on the inside corners of an L-shaped robot.

Why wouldn't you? What about that image implies it's okay to not have bumpers on the inside corner?

What that image DOES show is that an L-shaped robot's FRAME PERIMETER would be different than you expect. Concave frame perimeters aren't valid.

CalTran 16-01-2013 19:20

Re: Wheelless Robot?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris is me (Post 1216822)
Why wouldn't you? What about that image implies it's okay to not have bumpers on the inside corner?

What that image DOES show is that an L-shaped robot's FRAME PERIMETER would be different than you expect. Concave frame perimeters aren't valid.

I believe he's saying an L shaped robot like the one in the bottom right corner of the figure.

PAR_WIG1350 16-01-2013 20:48

Re: Wheelless Robot?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by CalTran (Post 1216824)
I believe he's saying an L shaped robot like the one in the bottom right corner of the figure.

Exactly, the image shows that all corners of the frame perimeter must have bumpers on both sides. It is impossible to have an inside corner to a frame perimeter so there is no sense in talking about them.

CalTran 16-01-2013 21:06

Re: Wheelless Robot?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by PAR_WIG1350 (Post 1216869)
Exactly, the image shows that all corners of the frame perimeter must have bumpers on both sides. It is impossible to have an inside corner to a frame perimeter so there is no sense in talking about them.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something here, but isn't it all external frame corners? The 'bot in the bottom right corner does have an inside corner that's un-bumpered?

Chris is me 16-01-2013 21:28

Re: Wheelless Robot?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by CalTran (Post 1216878)
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something here, but isn't it all external frame corners? The 'bot in the bottom right corner does have an inside corner that's un-bumpered?

Look at how the FRAME PERIMETER for the L shaped robot is defined. The black line skips right over the concave section. So, no, you don't need bumpers inside the L, that's true, but the inside of the L isn't the frame perimeter. The team in question seemed to think it was.

cmrnpizzo14 16-01-2013 21:34

Re: Wheelless Robot?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RRLedford (Post 1214051)
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


This is off of the climbing mechanism ideas thread located here

I think you guys might want to get in touch, it's certainly a viable robot design that could do surprisingly well if it is reliable.

dtengineering 16-01-2013 21:50

Re: Wheelless Robot?
 
Cool idea... if the robot could climb to the top, deposit four coloured discs into the five point goal, and then hoist another robot into the 30 point zone, you might have something there.

Let's see.... that would be 30+20+30=80 points.

On the other hand, looking at the "robot in three days" machine scoring into the 3 point goal, it might be easier to:

Score 3 discs in the high goal during auto, return and load with four discs, scoring 3 of them into the high goal each trip, completing three such trips, and then complete a ten point climb.

18+27+10= 55 points.

So it looks good for the stationary climber... if they can somehow hoist another, non-climbing, machine into the 30 point zone. Otherwise, I'm not sure the math supports the strategy.

Jason

jwallace15 16-01-2013 21:50

Re: Wheelless Robot?
 
Shall I bring this back up? :rolleyes:


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:48.

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