![]() |
Re: Bottom stacker or top stacker ?
The more I read the more I want one of each in my alliance.
Consider a bottom stacker all alone in a match. That bot would go for the easy stuff first: grab a container. have human toss out a tote stack repeat tote stack until it has 6 or stack is too high to manage move to scoring. bottom stacker can do that pretty quickly, but it eventually has a problem: no more easy to get to totes ! they are all piled in the landfill. It now has to push them around somehow to get at them...not easy while carrying a stack. Now imagine an efficient bottom stacker working with a forklift like top stacker. The top stacker can wade into the pile of totes in the landfill, stacking some, or just tossing them out for bottom stacker to grab hold of. |
Re: Bottom stacker or top stacker ?
For option one you just have to keep in mind the fact that your robot cannot extend past 78 inches vertically at any time during the match. This means that no robot will be able to legally put a recycle bin on top of a 6 tote stack and it may be very difficult to stack a bin on a 5 stack of totes.
|
Re: Bottom stacker or top stacker ?
Quote:
|
Re: Bottom stacker or top stacker ?
Quote:
|
Re: Bottom stacker or top stacker ?
Our team is prototyping both, and I would strongly suggest every team to try to do the same. I'm more of a proponent of a top stacker though, because I think the recycling bin is the most valuable game piece. Also, I think there will be a good number of robots able to make 3-4 tote stacks, but unable to cap them.
|
Re: Bottom stacker or top stacker ?
Quote:
Last year plenty of robots perched balls onto their tall frames to shoot them, but they were not penalized. |
Re: Bottom stacker or top stacker ?
If the game pieces are not part of your robot, it should not be penalized.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 18:43. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi