Similar Bot Designs
 

I was looking at some videos of multiple different robots and realized a little trend. All of the robots I was watching robots winning regionals pretty much fell under three categories:

Tunnel-Box bots (Perfected by 67, but most common design)

Scorpio-Bots (Look at 27, 33, 1114, 217, 148, etc. and you will see it)

Deflectors (Perfected by 469, but many others do)

I really enjoy watching this years game, and being one of two scouting captains, I appreciate it tremendously. Scouting was fun this year. I just hope that next year, the game allows for more diverse robot designs. I know there are a few very notable exceptions to this list (1918, 910, etc.) but a majority of the bots this year fall under those three categories. Comments?

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

Yeah, I think I have another category: robots like 330, 2016, 71, 2753, and others that have hooks coming out of the middle of their robots.

I think 1918 and 910 belong in their own group along with 1986 and other wide robots.

Perhaps another category for wide robots with swerve: 70, 494, 20, 11, 226, etc.

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

I put 70, 494 in the deflector category, but yea, wide swerve robots do deserve their own category.

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

Wait a moment! I think your missing hanging bots!

I think most designs are the same this year, because there wasn't a lot to do this year.

You had to score balls, and some teams wanted to elevate. Many teams just looked at scoring, and how they could do it the best. Generally, these are tunnel bots, but I have seen quite a few bump bots that score very well, even better then tunnel bots.

And then there were teams that wanted to be able to traverse the bump, because to them flexibility in position would be key to getting and scoring the balls. Some of these teams decided to go with a hanger, because it was extra points, so why not!

And then there were teams, like 469 and 2337, that completely gave up the bump and tunnel for their strategy. Both deflectors (469 obviously having it much more perfected), we (2337) decided to go where we thought the real points would be, and make a bot designed for hanging and suspending other bots. We've only gotten to suspend once, but I'd say our hanger is the most reliable hanger out there.

So, I agree, many bots look the same this year, but I think the game limited most of it. Many teams that wanted to go over the bumps/traverse the tunnels couldn't be 5 ft. tall, so many of them stayed low. Mostly everyone has a kicker/ball magnet, and there are a handful of people that can hang.

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

You are forgetting the small robots ;)
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/35279

This is one of the three (that i know of) small robots made this year.
1501 having the other two.

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

2200 Built a 54 lb 4 Omnis 90deg opposed robot for Waterloo.

1075 is a wide swerver. It was ORIGINALLY an invertible wide swerver, until we determined that the weight was better spent improving our arm, however, it ran Waterloo in its invertible configuration.

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

Do you have any pics or nice video of that? it sounds AWESOME!

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

I was just about to post something about them, but I couldn't remember their team number, as I saw them flipping between ~4 webcasts that day.

I thought team 2200's robot was so cool. :D

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ight=DS+Swerve
Pat Fairbank took some pics of it, links in my post at the bottom of that thread.

Any video of WAT containing us will show it. In Q51 we tried to intentionally flip it just to show that we could.

Theres a decent picture of it on the signboards which will be attached to our pits at CMP too.

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

About 910's robot:

I suggest a subcategory. Offensively-focused bots (subsection of tunnel bots), ones who are designed for scoring.

From what I've seen so far this year, 910, 2771, and 3302 are great examples (573 is pretty good at it too, but they are a little bit more well-rounded). They tend to be tunnel bots who can herd balls into the goals in the offensive zone, and can zip to the middle to grab a couple and come back.

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

What about the poofs? They could hang. Go over the bump. (Could the go under?)

Where do they fall

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

You definitely have the most reliable hanger I've seen. Even if you 1/2 miss, you still elevate with only one hook.

Yes, I also agree that the game limited the diversity of robots this year. I think in making it simple and fun to watch, they took that aspect away.

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

For hangers in this years game you really have to look at two different things: how they hung, and from where on the field they hung.

I saw robots that could hang from the front of the tower, the back of the tower and even the sides by going on the bumps.

There were robots that could lift themselves up using the vertical bars (1403, 25, etc). Lifting from the top bar (by far the most common design). Or some oddballs like 1100 who extended an arm and grasped the platform and flipped their robot on to the platform & 219 who would inflate an air bag on the top of their robot and did the same thing as 1100.

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

254 looks and acts like a "tunnel" robot (except they much prefer to go over the bump - it's faster) until the last 20 seconds. Then a two-jointed hanging arm (for the vertical pole) bursts dramatically out of the bot! It's very exciting.

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

And then you have bots like us, who started life as a telescoping top hanger, and have changed to a vertical bar hanger with no moving parts. (except the hinge)

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

I'm just curious when 910 started going through the tunnel...

And aren't most tunnel bots designed for scoring?

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

1986 would be in the swerve group.

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

I know that there are tons of different arm designs, but i was referring to the basic shape of the robot. For example, 70, with their mechanism on, would fall under the Deflector Category. Without, it would fall under the Tunnel Box Bot design.

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

Perhaps you could break this down further:

(Zone Change)
Tunnel-Bots
Bump-Bots
Both-Bots

(Hanging)
Scorpio Hang- vertical bar
Generic Hang- top bar

(Ball Magnet)
Pincher BM
Roller BM
Pusher

(zone preferance)
Far Zone
Middle Zone
Home Zone
Anywhere
So team 33 would be an Scorpio Bump Pincher Anywhere Bot.

Hummmm... What other categories am I missing?

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

You forgot suckers here. Those that use suction to hold the ball. I have seen a few.

And our bot would tend to be offensive but can be defensive. We just like offense better. Pref. to mid and close zones, but start in back.

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

Andrew, thats what "Anywhere" means. Besides we have played some pretty good defense before (Troy comes to mind) even if we generally like to be scoring. Therefore, because we have quite a flexible robot that can easily play any zone I put us in the "Anywhere" section.

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

Unless we're playing 469:rolleyes:

Re: Similar Bot Designs
 

you forgot the types of kickers...such as long distant kicker, short range kicker...etc