[MCC] Minimum Competive Concept 2016
 

Previous years are located:
MCC2015
MCC2014
It contains the links to even other previous years.

Here we go:

Each year I am amazed by what teams come up with to compete in FRC. Teams have a ton of wonderful ideas and some even see good execution of those ideas.

I would like this thread to focus on the "Minimum Competitive Concept" for a robot for 2016. It is often easy to identify all the possible tasks you could have a robot do. Prioritizing those tasks, and realizing it in the form of a competitive robot is in my opinion much more impressive.

If you haven't watched the Simbotics Strategy Presentation, please do before responding to this thread. Especially review the "Golden Rules 1&2".

Assumptions are that one of the primary goals of the MCC is to play in elims (not necessarily win on Einstein), and your team has mid-pack to lower fabrication resources.

Please list your assumptions, strategy to seed high, estimate of a winning score, and what robot design elements would achieve this score.

I personally usually assume for this thread that the goal is to seed high enough to be either a Alliance Captain or a pretty early pick. I would appreciate this year if we kept towards that philosophy.

I request you do this exercise first, and then you may want to see what the excellent folks from WCP & Vexpro brought to the table.

Re: [MCC] Minimum Competive Concept 2016
 

For this year, I would say that the goals for an MCC robot would be as follows:
Can do Low Bar, Portcullis, both Category B, both Category D defenses, and assistance for Category C defenses.
Scoring in the Low Goal.
Cross in Auto for most Defenses, reach for other Defenses.
Park on batter for contributing to the Capture.

Robot requirements:
Some sort of "active" boulder intake (Similar to 2010 ones)
WCD or 8 wheel drop with 6" pneumatic wheels
Low static wedges to force Portcullis up

Match strategy:
Auto: Cross defense with ball for 10pt Auto
Teleop: Focus on quick breach of the defenses, while also scoring occasional low goal to help assist in weakening of tower. If paired with two high goal shooters, while breaching defenses also help by ferrying boulders across defense and giving the scoring robots an ample supply or boulders.
End game: Quick score of any left over boulders in the courtyard in Low Goal if there is still 1 health on tower, then park on Batter for Capture.
The strategy during Elims would be that the two other robots are the main scoring robots, while our MCC robot breaches defenses and helps feed balls to the slower 2nd pick shooter. Ideally the 1st draft will be able to assist in the breaching but focus on boulder cycles.

During Alliance selections, the priority is to pick up a high goal scoring robot that can also help damage other defenses. Then, the second pick would be a slower shooter who hopefully has a scaling mechanism.
Reasonings:
Obviously this robot is built more to play the RP system than it is to play the Game itself. Which I think is perfectly okay for a team to set out to do. I would say that it is a reasonable assumption that each robot on an alliance during Qualifications can score ~3 boulders (40 second cycles), and with this robot focusing on breaching defenses, it would be able to get 3-4 RP each match and seed high.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
While a bit more advanced than the MCC, I believe that 1296's Mittens designed a good example of an MCC robot for this year, and that the high goal scoring capability would be something that a robot could reasonably add over time during the season (And a must have for Championships), even if it isn't exactly the pneumatic cannon that Full Metal ran.

Re: [MCC] Minimum Competive Concept 2016
 

Assume: RPs from breaching and capturing are important (they'll get ya 20 and 25 points later)
Assume: Early-season event (there's a slightly different assumption for a later-season event)
Assume: Everybody (else) goin' low bar

Requirements:
--A/B/D obstacles
--Visibility from far end of field
--C obstacles from Courtyard
--Boulder Handling (Low Goal)

Nice to Have:
--Activate C obstacles from Neutral Zone
--Low Bar capability
--Hanging

The plan: Drive over defenses B/D (25 points if one is done in auto), execute the spin move on the Sally Port (or the equivalent on the drawbridge--10 points), pick off any remaining low bars (10 points), possibly tackle the A defense if there isn't anything left (10 points) and go park on the batter (5 points). If possible, take a boulder each trip to feed others or shove in low goal (2 or 5 points per trip, 5-6 trips easily). I figure that's 1 RP and up to about 60 points/match solo, which would give a high chance of a match win when combined with partners' scoring.

For early-season events, that strategy can rack up some serious points. Can't really argue with a full breach done quickly and a ferry-bot. FRC2637 is a prime example (they're the small red-bot)--this was after their finalist run in San Diego (and resulting Wild Card). They had a couple of specialist mechanisms for A and C defenses (though in the match shown, they didn't use 'em on C).


When everybody's breaching in later-season events, the focus will need to be more towards delivering boulders to the tower. But that's something to tune in.

Re: [MCC] Minimum Competive Concept 2016
 

If I was with a relatively new team with limited resources, I would make a robot that only goes under the low bar and score up close high goals with a pneumatic catapult. May not rank the highest but would be a solid pick by a lot of alliances.

Re: [MCC] Minimum Competive Concept 2016
 

I'd like to offer up Team 5811, BONDS Robotics from Ohio as this year's MCC.
http://www.thebluealliance.com/team/5811

5811 had an intake and a decent drivetrain. They could score up to 6 low goals in a match, and could cross most of the defenses that mattered.

They were the 7th alliance captain at their first event, upsetting the 2 seed and winning Rookie All-Star. They were the second selection of the 8th alliance captain at their second event, almost upsetting the #1 seed in three close matches.

They competed in the Hopper Division, and were very high on our picklist for third and fourth robots.

Re: [MCC] Minimum Competive Concept 2016
 

Requirements (rough priority order):

1. Durable design that survives matches (minimal radio reboots, brownouts, thrown chains, stripped gears, tipping, etc).

2. Can challenge tower

3. Capable of crossing terrain defenses in tele-op

4. Capable of acquiring and spitting out boulders

5. Capable of crossing terrain defenses in autonomous

6. Capable of crossing low bar in tele-op

7. Capable of crossing low bar in autonomous

8. Capable of crossing category A defenses in tele-op



Differentiating factors (how to stand out compared to other similar bots):

1. Low goal autonomous

2. Category A autonomous

3. Robot visibility past category C defenses

4. Shot blocking device

5. Predictable/controllable positioning after autonomous crossings

6. Autonomous routines with delays

Re: [MCC] Minimum Competive Concept 2016
 

There are several different robot designs this year that meet this criteria, I think.

Ultimately, the robot needs to do the following:
- Cross two defenses a match regardless of the configuration on the field (both defenses of one category + the low bar should do it)
- Pick up balls and score them in the low goal
- Stay on the batter
- Push

I do think you need a pickup to be consistently competitive. You can win events without one but you won't consistently seed well. This robot can seed #1 with some luck (or the ability to cross more than 3 of the 9 defenses).

Re: [MCC] Minimum Competive Concept 2016
 

Being a on a rookie team with only freshmen and sophomores, we really had to find the most simple robot that we would be able to build in 6 weeks. We decided to go with a low goal/ resupply robot. The chassis is an AMU14 with the 8 in. pneumatic upgrade kit. The intake and shooter was a spinning pool noodle. And that's pretty much it for functionality.

We seeded 15th at SVR, and won rookie all-star, then seeded 68th in Curie and was chosen by the 4th alliance as backup. (shout out to 5803, 3310 and 2168). I don't our robot could be competitive on Einstein but it was probably one of, if not the simplest robot that I saw at CMP.

5940's TBA page: http://www.thebluealliance.com/team/5940

Re: [MCC] Minimum Competive Concept 2016
 

I think 1257's 2016 robot exemplifies the minimum competitive concept for this year. To quote one of the other mentors, "we do all the easy things really well":

• Fast, robust drivetrain
• Quick intake to enable up to 7-8 low goals a match
• Able to breach all non-C defenses from the neutral zone
• Able to breach Sally Port starting from the courtyard
• Able to reliably challenge
• Drivers practiced prior to competition

This robot was:

• Winner at Mount Olive as the 7th Alliance Captain
• Finalist #1 seed at Bridgewater-Raritan
• Winner at MAR Championship as the second pick of the first alliance
• Division semifinalist as the third pick of the second alliance, playing in all of our alliance's matches in place of the second pick

As I tell students on both of my teams, a good robot with great strategy beats a great robot with good strategy. In playoffs, we beat many sophisticated robots with our simple low-goal cycler thanks to smart driving and well-executed strategy.

Re: [MCC] Minimum Competive Concept 2016
 

Team 836, the RoboBees, did the MCC this year.

- Ridiculously fast and agile drive train
- Durable, reliable over-bumper intake
- Intake also served as a Class A manipulator
- Robot was extra short to facilitate going under the low bar at speed
- Low Goal autonomous was very consistent for an extra 5 points

Primary Roles
- District Events: Breach, Low Goal
- District Champs: Breach, and Low Goal better than anyone else
- World Champs: Breach, sometimes Low Goal, sometime Feed. Easily the best feeder bot I saw. They did 9 low goals in their first Qual match.

Re: [MCC] Minimum Competive Concept 2016
 

This year especially, build something that won't break. And If it breaks, easy to fix between matches.

Add a quick ball intake/discharge for low goals, at most events you can seed in the top 8.

Last is driver practice. Practice practice practice. Two teams with identical drive trains but differing drive experience preform drastically different. Lack of robot features can be compensated with lots of practice.

Re: [MCC] Minimum Competive Concept 2016
 

Fixed that for you ;) .

At champs we had one match where we scored 6 low goals while being disconnected for 40 seconds of the match, and still another where we scored 7 low goals while carrying the breach for our alliance (I think 5 or 6 out of the 8 crosses). I'm convinced we could have scored more than 7 if the right situation presented itself.

But seriously, thank you for the mention, but I think we slightly exceeded the criteria for an MCC. We kinda set out to build an MCC this season with our goal of making playoffs at both our regional events. We ended up over-shooting the MCC by a bit with surprise ability to cross the portcullis and auto routines for crossing 3 unique classes of defenses rather consistently. But overall I'd say we're a fairly close example.

Re: [MCC] Minimum Competive Concept 2016
 

I'd like to also show off my team's robot (Team 5150) as an example of the MCC for this year. Simple, cheap, and robust were our objectives for the season. Total cost was a little over $1,000 which allowed us to have a practice bot and a competition bot. We had a drivetrain that went through many iterations to find the best option as well as an accessory arm that acted as a ball intake, anti-tortuga arm, and the class A defense manipulator. We were able to cycle fast low goals. (8 a match.) As well as act as a defender at MSC eliminations and Newton eliminations. We were 1st alliance captain at Kettering #1, 4th alliance captain at MSC, and 5th alliance captain at CMP in the Newton division.

Check out the event details here: http://www.thebluealliance.com/team/5150

Check out more of the robot and get in touch with us here: http://hybridhornets.weebly.com/robots.html

Re: [MCC] Minimum Competive Concept 2016
 

This was basically the goal for 3005 as well.

Our robot was a chain in tube, 8WD pneumatic drivetrain, with a dual roller intake on one side and a single roller intake on the other. We could easily breach all the defenses (including a sally port spin and drawbridge if we had to drive over, tap, drive back).

By champs, we could cycle 6-8 low goal boulders per match.

We were #2 seed of ~60 at Alamo, and the #2 AC and regional finalists. We were #2 seed at Dallas of ~45, but ended up out in SF due to a couple alliance issues. At champs, we were #7 seed in Curie, and ended up leading that alliance to the Curie finals, missing out on Einstein by 2 points in one match, and 1 point in another.

The keys were recognizing the opportunity early in our season, getting a second bot built for the first time to get a huge amount of driver practice, and a focus on absolute reliability and scouting. We never missed a match, lost comms, or had a major component failure that wasn't fixed in 10 minutes or less.

Link to Youtube video of robot

Re: [MCC] Minimum Competive Concept 2016
 

So we are looking for minimum competitive concept. 4 wheel 8 or 10 inch pneumatic tires. 4 cim drive geared around 8 ft/s. (With MCC you get agile or fast, but not both). A fast intake capable of squirting the ball in the low goal. Intake could be a combination of wheels and pneumatics. A simple arm actuator for the category A defenses. This could almost be assembled with KOP and first choice parts. especially for a second year team.

With this you could breach by yourself if you had to. Score a low goal autonomous fairly consistently. Break the tower with a little help (and pick up the extra RP). This would you get picking at most districts & regionals. To win in eliminations you would need the help of a high goal capable robot on your alliance. (Add good scouting to the list)