Arms anyone?
 

There is a lot of talk about lifting other robots(including my team), and from the looks of it, most are going to be able to do it one way or another. In the end, it might just be left to who can get it done in time.

But what of the ringers? They might start making difference if everyone is going to be able to elevate their alliance.

Which arm do you guys think is going to perform the best: a complex dynamic arm that might work as good as a human arm or a simple elevator style system.

Dynamic arm:

Well it's complex and hard to manufacture, but it might give the flexibility needed to efficiently place the ring form a distance.

Elevator:

They have fewer moving parts, thus they are easier to build. But their limited range of motion might hamper their efficiency and speed.

Re: Arms anyone?
 

would u really wanted to be lifted what if you get dropped/something gets pulled
there are so many things that could go wrong personally i think get lifted by another robot would endanger my team's robot:D

Re: Arms anyone?
 

Our team is going with an arm. If you are looking for ideas look at alot of the old games 2005 being the most recent. There are alot of good ideas.

Re: Arms anyone?
 

Well it seems to be the craze in every thread...

Re: Arms anyone?
 

I just want an opinion, if a complex arm is better or worse than a simple elevator system?

Re: Arms anyone?
 

I don't really understand your definition of a "dynamic arm," but if you mean a jointed arm then I think you have it all wrong. A jointed arm would be less complex and would give you plenty of flexibility for scoring.

Re: Arms anyone?
 

Dynamic = multiple joints and axises of motion

Requires lots of motors, wiring, sensors, and programming.

I completely agree that it is highly flexible for scoring, but it is not easy to build(we have never done it)

Re: Arms anyone?
 

Doesn't necessarily require lots of motors, or wiring..or sensors. It depends on your design. You design how simple or how complex it will be.

You can have a 6 jointed arm in which each joint is independently controlled wtih 6 motors, or you can have a 6 jointed parallel arm that is totally designed with chain to keep the end parallel to the ground, or to move in such a certain way with just one or two base motors to control the whole thing.

The arm has the advantage over the elevator lift in speed and flexibility.

Re: Arms anyone?
 

I think the word for it is an "articulated" arm.

One disadvantage to that is it becomes cumbersome for the driver to control is there are too many joints, and it also requires a great familiarity with the system in order to make it run well. You have a much more complex coordinate system, and that can cause some confusion, especially once you get on the opposite side of the rack.

The elevator is much more intuitive. You understand the cartesian coordinate system, and that makes it much simpler to learn, and you will probably be more proficient with this system.

Overall which is better? I'm not sure. Our team is going with an elevator, but we may throw something in with the "claw" to make it more versatile.

Re: Arms anyone?
 

Do you think this might be a loaded question? You seem to be missing a few other possible choices that spring to mind, such as a simple dynamic arm (with perhaps two single axis joints), or a complex elevator system.

I'm eagerly awaiting our team's discussion of this subject, I think it will be influenced by impromptu experiments with the rings and a simulated rack. It might be that an elevator would require complex "stuff" on it to orient the rings so they can be scored, or to be able to pick up rings from the floor.

Re: Arms anyone?
 

This is where the electrical and programming comes in to create a mini control model that is highly intuitive(at least we will try).

Re: Arms anyone?
 

Our team is having this same debate currently, and spend a good 2 hours today talking about this and we are still very split. There are distinct advantages to both, elevator (forklift) type system is obviously much simpler to implement and control, but has less freedom of movement compared to a 2-jointer. The elevator system also (depending on how it is designed) most likely heavier, and placing a heavy elevator on the front of a robot can wreak havoc on how the robot drives. However an elevator system allows the manipulator to be simpler and would be far easier to program an effective autonomous program. So there are large advantages and large disadvantages, all you have to do is limit the disadvantages. :ahh:

Re: Arms anyone?
 

i would say that it would be easier to lift a robot by some type of elvator left system.

Re: Arms anyone?
 

If past FIRST robots are any guide, we're going to see a few robots with arms that absolutely do not work. The majority of robots with arms will work but not particularly well. There will be a small number that actually make an arm that is effective and an even smaller number of them will have multiple joints.

The long and the short of it is that arms are hard to make and even harder to make well. Add to that the difficulty in actually controlling an arm and the chances of making one successfully are even smaller.

Matt

Re: Arms anyone?
 

The more simple you can make something the less chance it has of breaking and the easier it is to make. what it comes down to in the end is does it work? and if so how well? i would prefer a simple design that works with two joints at most, possibly thing so it will be easy to make and have enough range of movement.