![]() |
Re: The Not So-Secret Secret End-Game
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Re: The Not So-Secret Secret End-Game
Quote:
|
Re: The Not So-Secret Secret End-Game
I hope to god this is true, that would save an otherwise terrible game IMO. Especially considering how awesome Rebound Rumble and Ultimate Ascent were. When we've seen the game for the first time I've had the same thoughts as other people around here stated before:
Personally I'd love it if FIRST and the GDC tried to emulate a real-life situation where you as an engineer are forced to replan your design because of a new restriction or requirement. Then again, if I were a student in this situation, the reaction would have probably been a little different :P |
Re: The Not So-Secret Secret End-Game
Quote:
|
Re: The Not So-Secret Secret End-Game
Can a robot enter the goalie zone on the side they are scoring on?
also, can parts of the robot enter the low goal?:confused: |
Re: The Not So-Secret Secret End-Game
Quote:
|
Re: The Not So-Secret Secret End-Game
For questioning if the Truss is too expensive or over-engineered there is another thing to look at. If you are going to span the full distance of the field without sag, you have to use a truss design or a seriously heavy duty steel beam that would require machinery to set into place. An aluminum truss can be set by people and span the distance necessary without sag and provide the durability necessary for robots potentially running into it if they were oversized.
|
Re: The Not So-Secret Secret End-Game
Also, the cost of one truss assembly made from COTs truss sections is probably way less than two custom fabricated pyramids.
|
Re: The Not So-Secret Secret End-Game
This thread is an awesome stress reliever. Thanks for the chuckle :-)
|
Re: The Not So-Secret Secret End-Game
Also, Also, there are two options for the Team Element truss. Cheapest option is two strings strung between 2x4s. Which works fine for just making sure you clear it, but you couldn't hang a robot off it.
More expensive option is a truss-like construction of 1/2" plywood all around. Plywood for the sides of the truss and plywood strips for the "angles" of the truss. Which might, maybe, be stiff enough not to sag (much) across a field width span. But you sure aren't hanging any robots off it without turning it into splinters. But if the GDC is willing to spring an entirely new game on us, they're probably more than willing to make teams waste $100 on wood for a useless game element. |
Re: The Not So-Secret Secret End-Game
Quote:
Honestly, the angriest I've felt towards the GDC was when, in 2012, we got to competition and discovered the mechanism we'd developed for pushing down the bridge we built to spec wouldn't even budge the actual bridges, which as you certainly recall, were so significantly heavier that they were entirely different. |
Re: The Not So-Secret Secret End-Game
my 2¢ about the truss...
these are standard lighting/rigging trusses that I'm sure FIRST has plenty of easy access to (and they really aren't that expensive). The GDC is not only responsible for creating a game, but also making it look good, and ensure that it can stand up to the rigors of competition. Sure a rope or volleyball net would have done the job but 1)it'd look really cheesy, and 2) when one of these big balls hits it, it would give, lose slack, sag, and have to be re-tensioned between each match. The trusses simply look good, and won't ever change dimensions.::cool:: |
Re: The Not So-Secret Secret End-Game
Quote:
|
Re: The Not So-Secret Secret End-Game
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:57. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi