Chief Delphi

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   Rules/Strategy (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=51143)

sanddrag 07-01-2007 14:37

Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
So, how many people will design their robot to be able to get on top of another robot (provided it has a small step or easy ramp or something of the sort). How many people are going to design their robot to accept their partner's wishes to climb on top of them? How high will the robots be in the end?

GMAdan 07-01-2007 15:05

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
our team is going to let other team get on top. We are designing a deplying ramp system. Also we plan to make sure the robot can with stand at least 250 pounds on it.

Cody Carey 07-01-2007 15:25

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by GMAdan (Post 550069)
our team is going to let other team get on top. We are designing a deplying ramp system. Also we plan to make sure the robot can with stand at least 250 pounds on it.


We were thinking about that... and one thought popped up: Last year the game field had a ramp on it and a lot of teams couldn't get up.
with this years field being pretty much smooth sailing, will anyone think to design a ramp-climber?

Bongle 07-01-2007 15:28

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Cody C (Post 550086)
We were thinking about that... and one thought popped up: Last year the game field had a ramp on it and a lot of teams couldn't get up.
with this years field being pretty much smooth sailing, will anyone think to design a ramp-climber?

It really depends on the ramp. If you have a 4-foot-long deployable ramp, then you're only looking at a 14 degree angle to climb, compared to Aim High's 30 degrees. Even drivetrains not designed specifically for ramps should be able to do that. But really, that'd probably be a feature of a given ramp design. I can see it while trying to get picked for finals "Team xxxx: With a 14 degree ramp that ANYONE can use".

lukevanoort 07-01-2007 15:33

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Cody C (Post 550086)
We were thinking about that... and one thought popped up: Last year the game field had a ramp on it and a lot of teams couldn't get up.
with this years field being pretty much smooth sailing, will anyone think to design a ramp-climber?

Remember, part of the problem last year for many teams was traction, they'd sit half on the ramp and spin their wheels. Nothing stops a team from putting carpet or a similar material that provides better traction on their robot's ramps. Angle/ground clearance/high centers of gravity issues on the other hand require a reduced angle, which is a bit harder to accomplish.

Tetraman 07-01-2007 15:38

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Handstand...period

MrForbes 07-01-2007 16:05

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
maglev....period

I'm waiting for the Standards Committee to be formed to put out a spec for supporting and supported robots :)

Wayne C. 07-01-2007 16:07

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
how about going around and capturing the other alliance's three robots and hoisting them up over 1 ft in your ends zone. Then allow your partners to also climb up....

you get points for robots over 12 inches- they lose penalty points for not vacating the end zone....



he he

raymaniac 07-01-2007 16:13

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wayne C. (Post 550118)
how about going around and capturing the other alliance's three robots and hoisting them up over 1 ft in your ends zone. Then allow your partners to also climb up....

you get points for robots over 12 inches- they lose penalty points for not vacating the end zone....



he he

Would that actually work?!?

Imajie 07-01-2007 16:26

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Actually they wouldn't be penalized. The rules state that if a robot is blocked while trying to exit the home zone during the end game they won't be penalized.

Quote:

<G24> Clearing HOME ZONE – the first audio signal, sounded five seconds before the start of the
END GAME, serves as a warning for ROBOTS to exit from the opposing HOME ZONE.
ROBOTS attempting to exit from the HOME ZONE after the audio signal may not be blocked
or impeded in this attempt.
<G25> END GAME play – ROBOTS may not occupy the opponents HOME ZONE during the END
GAME. Any ROBOT in an opponent’s HOME ZONE at the start of the END GAME will be
assessed a 10-point penalty. A second 10-point penalty will be assessed if the ROBOT is
still in the HOME ZONE 5 seconds after the start of the END GAME. Another 10-point
penalty will be assessed if the ROBOT remains in the HOME ZONE 10 seconds after the
start of the END GAME. However, a ROBOT that has been blocked or otherwise prevented
from exiting the HOME ZONE (as described in Rule <G24>) will not be assessed any
penalty.

Eric W. Jones 07-01-2007 16:30

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wayne C. (Post 550118)
how about going around and capturing the other alliance's three robots and hoisting them up over 1 ft in your ends zone. Then allow your partners to also climb up....

you get points for robots over 12 inches- they lose penalty points for not vacating the end zone....



he he

Quote:

Originally Posted by raymaniac (Post 550126)
Would that actually work?!?

It would not. it says in the handbook that if a robot is kept from leaving the opposing home zone, they are not assessed the ten-point penalty. Whether they would give the opposing team a bonus... :shrugs:

Branden Ghena 07-01-2007 16:57

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
We want our robot to allow another robot on top, and to still have enough power to get ourselves, with them on top of us, on top of another robot.

BrianR 07-01-2007 17:47

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
I've noticed that the majority of robots are planning for others to go on top of them. If you are paired with another ramp-bot, will you be able to climb them if necessary, or will you both end up on the ground?

How funny would that be, 3 ramps that could climb each other!

nuggetsyl 07-01-2007 18:05

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
I think everyone here needs to think about the tast at hand. Think about last years game and how big the ramp was. now think about about how big your robot is, a team who carries 2 robots will probally be useful for only that because of weight issues.

BrianR 07-01-2007 18:20

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by nuggetsyl (Post 550231)
I think everyone here needs to think about the tast at hand. Think about last years game and how big the ramp was. now think about about how big you robot is a team who carries 2 robots will probally be useful for only that because of weight issues.

I agree with this, the ramp teams are likely to only be able to be defense and a ramp. I guess that is a valid option, but my only sticking point is that the maximum number of teams that should have 2 robots on top is 1/3 of the teams. Any more than that and it is a waste and will result in very lopsided matches. I think that I would be more than happy to face an alliance with two ramp teams and one moderate scoring team.

DonRotolo 07-01-2007 18:55

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BrianR (Post 550211)
How funny would that be, 3 ramps that could climb each other!

...all at the same time, so none of them are touching the ground...:ahh:

I think a lot of teams are coming up with the same ideas, since a ramp is the easy kind of robot to build. You will definitely see alliances of three ramp bots, so sanddrag's comment is all the more notable - can yours climb a ramp too?


Don

Madison 07-01-2007 18:57

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Rotolo (Post 550275)
...all at the same time, so none of them are touching the ground...:ahh:

I think a lot of teams are coming up with the same ideas, since a ramp is the easy kind of robot to build. You will definitely see alliances of three ramp bots, so sanddrag's comment is all the more notable - can yours climb a ramp too?


Don

Along those lines...

For the love of all that is holy, people, please don't build robots that are micrometers short of the legal footprint. Go an inch smaller in all dimensions and you'll have a happier time fitting your robot onto someone else's, should you need to do that.

Phantomechanics 07-01-2007 19:05

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Thanx for starting this thread our team 2028 was wondering about this, we're not quite sure how we're going to work this but so far have thought about letting people on us, or taking a few penalty points and setting ramps up for the other bots, it works out to be a significant amount gained. but we aren't sure

Robo_Coyote 07-01-2007 19:23

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Our robot would be able to climb other robots we plan on using mainly the same drive train as last year but we plan on being able to let others get on us as well. Our robot would be able to do either or. Plus our drive train is a really powerful one so we could basically man up on the other teams top scorer and take them outta the match

=Martin=Taylor= 07-01-2007 19:57

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
We will be using a replica of a chassis we built in the off season.

After playing around with this chassis today, we found that it could climb a 15-20 degree slope. Keep in mind that this thing has a ground clearance of about an inch and was not designed for climbing.

As to whether we will be climbing or climbed, we are not yet certain. But it is most likely that we will be focusing most of our attention on ringing.

J23t 07-01-2007 20:17

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
im pretty sure that my team is planning on trying to accomplish both carrying a robot and possibly if needed, climbing on another one. we plan on using ramp method.. as far as i can tell from our last meeting...

Windwarrior 07-01-2007 22:31

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
What about a 'bot that others could link onto, and then LIFT both of them?

Wouldn't that be interesting?

Windwarrior
Mentor-Team 17777

T3_1565 07-01-2007 22:36

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
what happens with this poll if your thinking that your robot will do both???

George A. 07-01-2007 22:39

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
I think the only real way teams are going to stack is by using a ramp system.

Not to sound too cynical or anything but lets face it I highly doubt any team is going to let another team try to pick up their robot with an arm. There's just too much that can go wrong and take them out of the competition.

trilogism 07-01-2007 22:39

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wayne C. (Post 550118)
how about going around and capturing the other alliance's three robots and hoisting them up over 1 ft in your ends zone. Then allow your partners to also climb up....

There is a penalty for trying to drive on top of the opposing robots, and you can't have a ramp deployed outside of the home zone, so I don't know how well capturing would work.

Kevin Sevcik 07-01-2007 23:26

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BrianR (Post 550243)
I agree with this, the ramp teams are likely to only be able to be defense and a ramp. I guess that is a valid option, but my only sticking point is that the maximum number of teams that should have 2 robots on top is 1/3 of the teams. Any more than that and it is a waste and will result in very lopsided matches. I think that I would be more than happy to face an alliance with two ramp teams and one moderate scoring team.

I respectfully disagree. A system to score on the lower rung can be very simple and light. And the ramps shouldn't have to weigh more than 10ish lbs each, I think. I realize that's a good chunk of weight, but you'd still have a good amount to play with for other systems.

razor95kds 08-01-2007 00:19

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hachiban VIII (Post 550370)
We will be using a replica of a chassis we built in the off season.

After playing around with this chassis today, we found that it could climb a 15-20 degree slope. Keep in mind that this thing has a ground clearance of about an inch and was not designed for climbing.

As to whether we will be climbing or climbed, we are not yet certain. But it is most likely that we will be focusing most of our attention on ringing.

What happend to the helicoper?

Guy Davidson 08-01-2007 01:18

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric W. Jones (Post 550143)
It would not. it says in the handbook that if a robot is kept from leaving the opposing home zone, they are not assessed the ten-point penalty. Whether they would give the opposing team a bonus... :shrugs:

It is clear, as per <G56> ROBOTS in HOME ZONE - ROBOTS score bonus points at the end of the match if they are entirely in their HOME ZONE... Hence, grabbing opposite robots and lifting them won't score you points. It might also count as pinning, which would give you a penalty.

Parker 08-01-2007 01:26

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
What about four long pneumatic pistons that would lift the bot so another bot can drive under it. It's easier than a lifting device. The rods would be in danger though, so the cylinders could push down aluminum rods that lift the bot. Once a bot is underneith, raise the rods.

Tri_Lam 08-01-2007 01:32

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Parker (Post 550867)
What about four long pneumatic pistons that would lift the bot so another bot can drive under it. It's easier than a lifting device. The rods would be in danger though, so the cylinders could push down aluminum rods that lift the bot. Once a bot is underneith, raise the rods.

its a good idea but there is a chance that your allies may not be able to ahve anther robot on top of them

robostangs548 08-01-2007 10:23

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
I can tell you right now.... the ramp design for our robot is 0 degrees and can lift 2 robots 1 1/2 feet off of the ground. our robot is 4 feet 120 and has an arm, four wheel speed, and four wheel torque mode. Not sure if all in going to work since we are still in the designing stages, but it looks pretty promiseing. Anyway good luck everyone.

DjAlamose 08-01-2007 10:28

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hachiban VIII (Post 550370)
After playing around with this chassis today, we found that it could climb a 15-20 degree slope. Keep in mind that this thing has a ground clearance of about an inch and was not designed for climbing.

Seeing this tells me that a ramp that has an angle of 20 degrees or less is fine. It can be done easily (I'm looking at about 17 degrees for a ramp right now). Also knowing that bumpers need to be a minimum of 2.5" above the ground, if your frame matches that (even 2") then there should be no problem at all.

Also to teams building ramps, look at what material you plan on using and see if the surface (i.e. diamond plate) would make it easy or hard for a robot to climb up it. You can always cut holes and things in it to help with tracktion but remeber that some surfaces are still pretty slick.

Not only does your robot have to support its own weight (if you plan on holding other robots), if you have a second robot on top, you are now holding up 240 lbs or so. Having another robot squish yours would be a very bad experiance so plan on making your robot robust.

As for lifting robots, take into account the changing CG of your robot and the one you would be lifting. Also remeber to have a latching mechanism so when power is disabled the one you will be supporting doesnt come crashing to the ground.

Hopefully some of these tips will help someone. Just thought I would share my thoughts and experiances.

Parker 08-01-2007 15:00

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
What about having a ramp and the piston idea. Have a robot drive on top of you then fire the pistons. The pnuematics can easily lift the max. 240 lbs. of 2 robots. Besides, I don't think three robots stacked on top of 1 is really going to happen that much.

Zoheb N 08-01-2007 15:09

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Well our team had about a 45 min debate about if we should get robots on top of us or if we should get on to another robot.. after 45 mins we finally came to the conclusion that we would not be liftin other robots and would not focus on getting on top of robot but will try to be able to get on top of another one, but than again that was only a day 1 decision it could still change

LeadU2Fun 08-01-2007 15:47

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bongle (Post 550091)
It really depends on the ramp. If you have a 4-foot-long deployable ramp, then you're only looking at a 14 degree angle to climb, compared to Aim High's 30 degrees. Even drivetrains not designed specifically for ramps should be able to do that. But really, that'd probably be a feature of a given ramp design. I can see it while trying to get picked for finals "Team xxxx: With a 14 degree ramp that ANYONE can use".

With that trigonometry you will raise the robot 11.6". Remember the other option is to only raise them 4". One robot on each side raised 4 inches is the same as being able to raise one robot 12". Based on the difficulty the past robots had at getting up that high it might be a safer strategy to rely on two robots getting up a 16" ramp to achieve 4" at a 14 degree incline. A 4" step might not even need a ramp with many robots.

lukevanoort 08-01-2007 16:10

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
As a note to all teams planning to build lifter/ramp bots, or debating the idea like us, two robots is actually a max of about 297 lbs, (2*(120lb robot + 15lb bumpers + 13.5 lb battery) not 240lbs.

Michael Hill 08-01-2007 16:16

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by lukevanoort (Post 551330)
As a note to all teams planning to build lifter/ramp bots, or debating the idea like us, two robots is actually a max of about 297 lbs, (2*(120lb robot + 15lb bumpers + 13.5 lb battery) not 240lbs.

Ya, it seems like a lot of people forget about the bumpers and battery. They add a significant amount of weight.

Madison 08-01-2007 16:22

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Hill (Post 551341)
Ya, it seems like a lot of people forget about the bumpers and battery. They add a significant amount of weight.

...and it seems that people continue to forget to factor in the weight of their own structure. Remember that you're not only lifting their robot and its battery and bumpers, but also the platform and supporting structure of your own robot as well.

Kim Masi 08-01-2007 16:31

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
In the poll, it asks if teams would rather descore/rescore spoilers than climb on other robots...is anyone taking that route instead?

I think it's really going to depend on the way that particular match is going, whether its more benificial to move a spoiler or to lift two robots...

Emma O 08-01-2007 16:45

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
We were talking about this yesterday at our meeting and I think we're pretty set on letting another robot climb on us. Another teammate and I were working on ramp possibilities during physics class today. xD

roborat 08-01-2007 16:51

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
The way i read the rule, it states that the lowest part of the robot is higher that 4 inches above the carpeted surface. This would allow a platform to be deployed and let a robot climb it and not on my robot. We are looking at a prototype and it folds back over our robot and the arm is still useful for the ringers. After we get to the home zone, we will deploy the platform with a small ramp to climb. It will have to be parked sideways. Still researching this ideal.

gondorf 08-01-2007 18:48

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
my own team personally thinks that we can have a platform on top so the other 2 robots can climb up like the ramp last year but have the platform double as an arm for ringers. i personally think the helicopter was much more doable.:ahh: :eek: :cool:

LeadU2Fun 09-01-2007 09:02

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by lukevanoort (Post 551330)
As a note to all teams planning to build lifter/ramp bots, or debating the idea like us, two robots is actually a max of about 297 lbs, (2*(120lb robot + 15lb bumpers + 13.5 lb battery) not 240lbs.

Are you implying that the mechanism (ramp,platform,etc) that the other alliance robots are mounting cannot be touching the floor? I didn't see anything about that. We should be able to build a platform that rests on the floor and raises the other robot 4". The platform would only need to support the weight of 1 robot. You could have this on both sides of the robot and lift 2 of them.

Graham Donaldson 09-01-2007 10:18

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
I've seen the idea of a helicopter pop up once or twice, so I just have to say this again:

At the end of a match, the two drive teams on the chopper's alliance who will be picked up turn to one another and yell (in a GOVERNATOR voice): "GET TO ZE CHOPPUR- NOW!!"

The chopper team picks them up and says over a megaphone to the opposing alliance: "ASTA LA VISTA, BABY!"


Now, back to the topic. I won't give away how our team is planning to pick up robots, but suffice to say that we want to passively pick up one to 4"
(i.e. a ramp on top of our 'bot), and then worry about getting that one to 12", because that's more likely than two at 4" (hopefully one will be dealing with spoilers), and it's the same point value.

Ty Tremblay 09-02-2007 10:50

Re: Letting robots on top vs getting on top of robots
 
I think this poll is inaccurate. For instance, we have the capability to lift one or two robots 12" off the ground, but if there is a better lifter on our alliance, our lifts are removable, allowing us to ge lifted. And if our lift breaks, we can hang ringers until it is time to be lifted.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 18:54.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi