Front or Back Intake
 

Hey guys. This is my first thread on here, so bear with me. Which system is better for the boulders for eventual forward shooting/passing: a front intake or back intake system? Thanks.

That depends on your launching mechanisim

Re: Front or Back Intake
 

There are a lot of factors in play here.
I'm going to define "front" as the leading edge of the robot as it traverses toward your opponent's tower.

For scoring purposes, it would make sense to put it in front IF your pickup mechanism and your scoring mechanism are the same.

For retrieving the boulder from the midline, it would make sense to put it in back - that way you wouldn't have to turn around to go back through the Outer Works.

For traversing the Defenses, that depends on if your boulder manipulator device can also manipulate the defenses that need manipulating while holding a boulder. If so, put it in front; if not, put it in the back for protection purposes.

Another consideration: if the boulder intake is in front, that would theoretically make it more liable to be struck by opposing robots, so make it robust to survive strikes from many different directions.

Do some prototyping on different systems, see how they could fit together, and based on your findings, you may find your robot designs itself.

Re: Front or Back Intake
 

I'm willing to bet that some teams are planning on having both.

Re: Front or Back Intake
 

I hadn't thought about the back intake, it might solve a problem we noticed. Thanks!

Re: Front or Back Intake
 

We'll pick it up from the side. ;)

Seriously, I'm not really sure which end of our robot will be designated the front. Most of our designs have the boulder intake and launching on opposite sides, so I checked "back".

Edit:
We may not drive through every defense the same direction.

Re: Front or Back Intake
 

This year, I consider the end that drives first through the defenses to be the "front". But you may decide differently.

Re: Front or Back Intake
 

To me, "front" and "back" is a code issue. Sure, if everything happens out of one side of your robot, then it can be called the front. But if things happen out of opposite sides, why not include a switch on the driver station that lets you switch which way the robot moves when you push the joysticks foward?

Re: Front or Back Intake
 

I'll assume "front" refers to the shooter and harvester being on the same side, and "back" meaning the harvester is on the opposite side.

I'm kind of in favor of "front" in that case, to consolidate the shooter and harvester into one subsystem, and then have more room on the back to add manipulators, climbers, etc.

Re: Front or Back Intake
 

This discussion has come up with us too, for the sake of saving time in the match, have both, one in front and one in back, it will take up more space on the robot and more time to build however, it will prevent you from needing to do 180', the whole match for a boulder

Re: Front or Back Intake
 

Definitely planning on having both. It will be so much easier to be able to get the ball from either direction, less time spent on trying to line an intake up to get it. This is yet another concept you can prove by looking at games like Rebound Rumble

Re: Front or Back Intake
 

I'm not sure that analogy applies. In Rebound Rumble, teams got several game pieces then went to score them. In Stronghold, teams are limited to one game piece at a time. In RR, the travel path went through the game pieces to the next destination. In S, the game piece is the destination.

The back or and front of our robot are not going to exist as our programmer is going to program a button to invert this. That way we never have to drive backwards.

Re: Front or Back Intake
 

Are you thinking some type of turret ?

Re: Front or Back Intake
 

Not a turret, but a boulder path that goes over, through, or under the robot as it proceeds from pickup to launch.