Re: Announcing the 2013 December Design Competition
 

Large tetras that weights 9 lbs and some change. Might be a good place to look at how teams did it. How they stayed upright despite some teams holding 3/4 tetras 10'+ in the air.

Re: Announcing the 2013 December Design Competition
 

Unless I've missed something, I cannot find where the other 105 crates that are not in the loading station go. Can someone clarify this?

Re: Announcing the 2013 December Design Competition
 

There are 40 on each side of the field, placed randomly at the beginning of each match.

Re: Announcing the 2013 December Design Competition
 

Re: Announcing the 2013 December Design Competition
 

*facepalm*

Sorry!

Re: Announcing the 2013 December Design Competition
 

It's all good. We're only human. I'm sure someone else had the same question as you and your post cleared it up for them.

Re: Announcing the 2013 December Design Competition
 

I know you said that for descoring, everything but the stacked crates are fair game. Does this include the auton crates? Also, does the multipler(2x or .5x) apply to auton crates?

Re: Announcing the 2013 December Design Competition
 

I laughed way too hard at the title of your organization. Clever. XD

Re: Announcing the 2013 December Design Competition
 

The only thing that cannot be descored are stacked crates in the protected stack zone (the 18x18 square colored on each driver station wall) . Any stack outside of that zone is free game.

When descoring, you take away points at the value they are worth at the time of descoring. If you descore in teleop, the other alliance loses the amount of points they'd earn in teleop for that object. If you descore during autonomous, they lose the points that object would have scored in autonomous.

The multiplier crate changes score based off of the total score in a zone. If there is a mix of auton and teleop points in a zone, then it either doubles or halves the total points in the zone.

Re: Announcing the 2013 December Design Competition
 

Penalties are a bit harsh, no?

Also - very cool to see so many people involved in this. Good work Andrew & company.

Re: Announcing the 2013 December Design Competition
 

I was gonna make them 256 to some power (random number, no meaning), but decided that would be a bit harsh.

And I'm also glad to see so many people involved! I never imagined this would get as popular as it is! And thank you again for helping us out by donating a prize to the winning students. We really appreciate it!

Re: Announcing the 2013 December Design Competition
 

I think you forgot to change the logo on the side of the crate. :)
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/6-...bUpnQ_nmGoHg5A

This sounds like an amazing competition; perfect for getting hyped before build!
I hope SRC (SECOND Robotics Competition) can become a regular thing in the future!

Re: Announcing the 2013 December Design Competition
 

Now that I have had a few days to look over the competition, I thought I would share my initial thoughts on the game and share my initial design strategy before I go and CAD it.

Thoughs:

1. Stacking is a non-factor (like stacking in '03). Stacking is significantly more difficult than dropping crates in the tank (1pt and 2pt goal) however, until you get a stack taller than 6 crates (3*4=12pts), you could gain more points just dropping the crates in the 2pt goal. (2*6=12pts). And with only one safe place really to create your stack, why waste the time making a stack when a robot could quickly just knock it over.
2. Red alliance has a major advantage (for experienced teams) over blue alliance because of where the loading stations are. It is much easier to pick up a crate from the loading station then one scattered around the field, so this will be the main supply of crates for each alliance. Because of this, the distance from the red alliance loading station around the tank to the 2pt goal is much shorter than the distance from the blue alliance loading station to the blue 2pt goal. Also, the distance from the red alliance loading station under the overpass to the 1pt goal is much closer than the same trip by the blue alliance. This could allow red to score a few more crates a match just because of shorter driving times. However, if you are a low skilled team who is taller than 30" but can only score in the 1pt goal, you would much rather prefer the blue alliance.
3. Auton is near impossible. With robots unable to start preloaded with a crate, they would have to autonomously find one, and then score it. With an additional 40 crates scattered around the field, it would make preprogramed pathing near impossible. Expect no teams to ever score in auton.
4. There is not much difference between the 1pt goal vs the 2pt goal if you are an experienced team mechanical wise except: 1pt and being able to go under the overpass vs. 1&2pt and not able to go under the overpass. So does being able to go under the overpass allow you to score twice as fast?
5. 4pt goal is significantly more difficult than the 1/2pt goal. I would say that for 99% of teams they would be better served making a fast 1/2pt scorer than a lousy, slow 4pt scorer (im just bias due to how slow half the robots were in 2011 to reach 108 inches tall). However, if your team has the ability to make a fast elevator, the 4pt goal is much worth it due to it being less congested and worth more.

If my team was building a robot for this game (note MY TEAM not 1114). I would build a simple robot to pick a crate off the ground or from the loading station and then lift it and dump it in the 2pt goal with a small elevator. I would make it extremely fast and durable, using a 6 wheel WCD with a two speed transmission geared for 4-6/14-16fps. I would try and keep the CG as low as possible, but I would not worry about having it be under 30". I'll post my design in a week or so (I came up with a pretty clever gripper design).

About the game itself, I like the general idea for the game, but there are a few major flaws. Like said above, the red alliance has a major advantage because of where their loading station is, along with how most of the field will be littered in crates getting in every ones way. If I was to make a few improvements, I would move the loading station to the other side and ditch the overpass, along with get rid of the random crates and only have a few to start on the field while putting all of them in the loading zones. By removing the "random" crates (like is someone actually going to have a random number generator to determine where the crates should go) and placing it in the loading stations, you create a less cluttered game while making field reset much easier and quicker.

Also with the crates, they would most likely shatter if dropped from the 4pt goal, let alone into the tank. So I will just assume that they won't be destroyed in competition for my design.

Re: Announcing the 2013 December Design Competition
 

The distances to any particular object is the same for both alliances. I'm unsure of what you're referring to.

Re: Announcing the 2013 December Design Competition
 

Does "40 crates randomly positioned on each side of the white line." mean that there are 40 crates on the field total, or that there are 40 on each side?