![]() |
# of Totes WORTH Stacking?
How necessary is it to build tall stacks of totes? Yes, a 6 stack of totes with a filled container is nice (42 points?), but versus for example, doing two 3 stacks w/ a filled container (48 points?).... is it worth it? What is your team thinking? :ahh:
|
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
Last night in our blog we posted reasoning for the exact elevation we are trying to lift and stack.
http://blog.spectrum3847.org/2015/01...4-bar-cad.html Summary, lift should be able to elevate an object 4.5ft. Allows you to stack a tote on top of 3 totes on the step and allows you to put a container on top of 4 totes if you are grabbing it by the lip. |
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
Quote:
|
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
Stacking 2 stacks of 3 may actually be quicker than 1 stack of 6, but there are only 7 totes available to each alliance (4 are shared), and if an alliance can average 1 stack of 6/robot/minute (which seems very reasonable for playoff alliances) you're going to run out of recycle containers awfully quick if you go only 3 high.
Maximize each container's value; go the distance. |
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
Quote:
|
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
Quote:
|
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
I'm thinking 5 or 6, but not sure which.
I personally think the main problem with stacking 6 is that if you want to hold six totes plus a container on your robot, any appendages that high get dangerously close to the 78" height limit. |
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
It's going to be five or six at the highest levels.. Most likely, all bins will be scored on tall stacks in these matches. So, it would seem the tallest stacks are best... However, as robots cannot be taller than 6'6" and a bin on top of six totes will almost entirely be above the maximum robot height: A stack of 6 totes is just over 6' and needed to be lifted at least 2" to place them in a scoring zone. This leaves a whopping 4" of recycling bin below the robot height limit.
This introduces a challenging engineering problem. Do you find a way to grab the bottom few inches of a bin? Or, do you rely on a very smooth riding robot and a skillful enough driver to not "bump" anything? I have not yet fully solved this "difficulty." However, it could very well be that for nearly every (every?) robot it is so much more efficient to maximize stacks at 5 totes and a bin... Of course, you then have to ask the value of taking a moment to stick pool noodles into the recycling bins... |
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
Quote:
|
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
Einstein will be all six stackers or two six stackers and a noodler with peripherals. Or six stackers with noodler abilities. However, looking at a point chart. four totes gets you almost as much as five anyway if you can noodle it.
To stack, simply lift an existing stack and slide a tote underneath it. Most forked lifters should be able to do this to get very high stacks up to six plus bins without issues. |
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
This year scoring is LINEAR, So it doesn't matter how high you stack for the bonus points as long as you stack the same amount of grey totes and place a recycling bin on top it will be the same. So then the question become well if I am only guaranteed 3 recycling bins how many grey totes can I stack? 12 in 3 stacks of 4 or 2 stacks of 6.
The answer to the question I think is based on your capability to score fast. If you can't score fast you can stack more smaller stacks versus larger stacks. |
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
Quote:
|
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
Quote:
|
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
Quote:
|
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
I think that it really depends on what kind of manipulator you end up building, and what sort of alliance you end up with. If you have a robot that can only stack from the bottom (As in lift stack, insert tote on bottom, place, repeat) then it's probably best to aim for 4-6 and maximize from there, but if you have a robot that can build stacks top down, then it might be more advantageous for your robot to move around and "cap" existing stacks with a container. If you're the only robot that can quickly stack, you might just want to go with 3-tote-container stacks and then score as many totes as you can after that.
|
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
Quote:
I am not trying to defend my team because I am insulted. Rather, I'd like to think I know the capabilities of an average team, and I am almost certain that the average team would not be able to produce something that can do as well as the Snow Problem robot. |
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
It really depends on the robot stability, however just like someone said, tote score is linear, so higher stacks are a waste unless you have a can on top (and if you are going to put a can you might as well put a noodle in it.
|
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
Quote:
I'm not saying either thought is a bad idea at all. I'm just saying that level six stacks with bins present some additional challenges that may make it more time-effective to max out at five. |
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
Quote:
I'm going to bet that for most teams, it'll be easier to pick up a tote with a "standard" grip than a bin with 4" of grip. And it will probably be more stable as well with a bin properly placed. In response to Caleb's comment: i think the build quality of the Snow Problem robot is probably middle to low tier, but the strategy is one that would make for an excelleny second or third pick, especially for teams that have the extra six weeks to "do it right" and improve the build quality. |
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
Quote:
|
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
Stacking any number of totes takes time. If one were to stack 3 totes, you will be able to easily stack the container on top of them. If you were to make a stack of over 6 totes, it would waste a lot of time and you risk knocking the entire stack over.
|
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
I wonder how much this poll will change at the end of builds season it would be interesting to see!!
|
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
The stack hight dilemma has four factors: the space the stacks take up, stability of the stack, if you have a container, and finally stack time vs unload time.
First off the most basic stack high vs stack out problem becomes, if I only stack out how soon will I run out of space to score totes. After a number of low stacks you will start running out of scoring space. Logic dictates to build up not out for this factor. Next is the stack stability. The higher the stack the less stable. This seems to be the crux of this debate. I personally think that in this game mistakes will be made and robots will bump the stacks, if the stacks are tall then it endangers your stack more. So short stacks is prefered here. Second to last we have, does the stack have a container on it. This is simple if yes then stack high, you have three containers for sure, so to make the most of the containers you should stack them high. They are your most limited resource in this game. Finally we have the stack time vs unload time conundrum. If your robot can stack faster than it can unload then you would be better to stack high rather than short.this is because if you can get it in 6 totes and unload then it'll be faster than getting in 3 totes and unloading then repeating that process. Time1= 6×totes+1×unload Time2= 2 (3xtotez+1×unload) Here the scores are bother the same but the extra unload instance takes time from scoring. In this case I think high stacks are better. |
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
Quote:
|
Re: # of Totes WORTH Stacking?
I think this question depends a lot on what kind of robot you plan on building. Do you plan on making a short, fast robot, or a bulky, large robot? Speed would make multiple stacks feasible, and as soon as multiple stacks become a possibility, it is my opinion that trying to balance 6 totes isn't worth the time it takes to stack them.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:39. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi