Quote:
Originally Posted by =Martin=Taylor=
When I see robots like this I just have to ask the question....
why....
why.........
why would you NOT build a roller claw????
Admit it, claws have no advantage over roller claws. none.
|
Eh, you may want to qualify this claim.
- I don't think any of the roller claws I've seen have weighed 2.5 lbs like our simple claw does (due to motor/gearing).
- I don't think any of the roller claws I've seen cost as little as our roller claw did to fabricate (assuming free labor) -- $30 raw, $12 actual used parts (+ 1 free Bimba cyllinder & 1 KOP solenoid valve).
- Roller claws take much more to fabricate and maintain as well.
- Ours is designed to have a similar amount of room for driver error that a skinny roller claw does.
- If it gets ripped off, we have another one since 2.5 lbs is easy to fit in the withholding allowance.
- In the worst case where 2 get ripped up, we could build another one in under half an hour.
So if you're naive to always fall for 'THE best' type claims about any one design in FRC, sure roller claws would win for fastest & flashiest I suppose. Yet there is plenty of anecdotal evidence that it doesn't matter on the FRC field (330 in 2007, 217 in 2008) as much as strategy & driver practice does. So to me, holistically, roller claws and pinchy claws (or inverse-pinchy in our case) are pretty much the same for the majority of teams out there (including those who have never heard of CD) -- so long as they grab the tube in a reasonable amount of time with a reasonable room for error, then hold on to the tube, then let it go, it doesn't really matter which design is chosen.