Vability of a particular climbing system
 

One of the members of my team suggested a pneumatic-run method of climbing: the bot goes in the inside of the 'mid, and slowly elevates itself using as many pistons as is feasible to push off the ground. A pole touches level 1, and a hook is positioned *above* level 2. The air is released faster than the acceleration due to gravity so the pistons retract, and the robot falls, but this hooking mechanism lands on level 2. Yes, it goes airborne for a split. It is dubbed "flying with style".

Now I know that we probably shouldn't use a coat hanger and duct tape for the hook, so I was wondering what was okay. Is a standard steal hook fine? Should we use more than one or two?

Many thanks for any and all help that you can give us. The more precise (and perhaps mathematical) the responses, the better.

Good luck to all the other teams in their goal of climbing!

Re: Vability of a particular climbing system
 

I had a similar idea, but mine was to have a hook go up to level 3, touch level 1, have a second arm below level 2, Have the robot jump and catch level 3.

A steel, aluminum, wood hook should all be fine, it all depends on how you build it.

Do you or someone else have any math to back up that the pistons retract faster than the robot falls?

Re: Vability of a particular climbing system
 

I was thinking that simply having many small pistons evenly distributed across the base of the robot would sufficiently hold it up, and the fact that they're small (with a lot of them for a large amount of PSI) would mean that they retract very quickly. I assume that it would not be especially difficult to have them operate in tandem.

Re: Vability of a particular climbing system
 

I think the fact that you want to go airborn will significantly increase the durability of the hooks you need, but I don't have data to back it up

Re: Vability of a particular climbing system
 

You do know you can't touch more than two levels at a time, or jump levels... right?

Re: Vability of a particular climbing system
 

Yes I know, touch level one from the top, hold another arm below level 2. and have your grasping mechanism under level 3. have your Robot jump, when it does it will stop touching level 1, touch level 2, then grab onto level 3. then pull yourself up.

Re: Vability of a particular climbing system
 

Do you have any idea how much moment force that would put on a hook?

Re: Vability of a particular climbing system
 

I see what your saying and think that a drawing might help others understand your plan.

Re: Vability of a particular climbing system
 

Retracting the jacking cylinders simultaneously will be complicated by the lengths of tubing and locations of the solenoid valves involved. The longer the path for the escaping air the slower it will travel, much like current in a higher resistive circuit. That said, you may even want one side of the robot to start falling earlier if you're depending on a slight tilt to engage your second rail hook. It's similar to building demolition that sets off the severing charges in a calculated sequence to get the building to fall in a certain direction.

You should be able to devise an small experiment to see if the retraction happens fast enough. Suspend a small ball with an electromagnet. position it the same distance above the table that you want the hook to fall. Devise a single push button switch that releases the air in the cylinder via a solenoid valve AND interrupts power to the electromagnet. It's now a race to see if the ball hits the deck before the cylinder is totally retracted. Repeat observations until you're convinced one way or the other about how fast that cylinder can retract.