Hey guys. Sorry for the extreme delay. With the end of school, I've been a little swamped with exams and getting stuff straightened out. Without further adieu, here's the updated design list:
Drives:
Swerve Drive, as seen by 16, 1717, 973 and others
-Omnidirectional drive system allowing teams to move in any direction, anytime.
-The Swerve Drive in 2012 aided teams in a variety of ways. With it, teams were able to drive onto the bridge on either the long or wide orientation. It also gave teams an amazing ball intake ability, allowing them to turn to any direction to acquire a ball. By avoiding defense robots, and traversing the field and acquiring balls quickly, Swerve drives had a huge advantage this year.
Ball Acquiring System:
Multi-Directional Drop Down Intake, as seen by 973,177 and 2415
-A drop-down intake system consisting of a series of rollers and urethane belt that sucked the ball into the robot, no matter what part of the device the ball contacted.
-This system gave the teams using it an amazing intake ability, being able to touch a ball with any part of the system and have it be acquired. This gave teams a lot of leeway when going to acquire balls, having a smaller chance of missing and not acquiring the ball.
Over-the-Bumper Intake, as seen by 469, 2056, , 2826, 341 and others
-The over-the-bumper intake system was a very common design in 2012, with many dominating teams using it. Essentially, it's just a collector system that drops out over the bumpers and lifts the balls up over the bumpers and into the robot. This can turn an entire side of a robot into a collector.
-By using this, teams were able to greatly speed up their collecting of balls. By making them as wide as the side of a robot, teams were essentially able to just drive at a ball and collect it. This proved to be a huge asset for teams who were shooting, and teams who were stealing balls.
Drop-Down Intake, as seen by 1114, 1323, 987 and many others
-The drop down intake is a different variation of the Over-The-Bumper intake. However, instead of lifting the balls into the robot, it sucks the balls in through a break in the bumpers.
-By using this, teams can extend their reach of ball acquisition, as well as widen their range. In addition, many teams used this as a bridge manipulator as well.
Ball Transport System:
Rotating tower, as seen by 33, 973, 177, 78 and others
-Instead of just the shooter rotating, the entire tower/storage system and shooter rotated. In doing so, balls entered the same way every time.
-In doing so, the teams who used this were far less prone to jamming as the balls would enter the tower the same way every time.
Perpendicular Entry” Tower, as seen by 971
-971's tower and intake system put the balls in around a corner, greatly reducing their risk of jamming.
-Like the rotating tower, 971 rarely (if ever) had ball jams, keeping their shooting consistent every match. Combine that with their lightening quick ball elevation, and 971 was a force.
Ball Scoring System:
Arm/Shooter combo, as seen by 548, 330, 1323 and others
-These robots had a shooter attached to an arm, allowing them to get their shooter up to the top basket, and pop the shoots out from a much closer distance.
-Many teams had an issue getting consistent key shooting throughout the season, but by having the shooter on the lift, the teams were able to greatly increase their consistency. Most of these teams also acquired the ability to shooter from distance, allowing them to circumvent defense.
Rotating Wheel Shooter, as seen by 1114, 610, 118, 1717, 399 and many, many others
-The rotating shooter is exactly as it sounds: A spinning wheel acting as a shooter, on a rotating device so it can point in different direction
-By using this design, teams could target a basket and face it with a turret design, and then shoot from a distance. By tracking the target well, teams using this could avoid defense and put in a lot of points.
Bridge Manipulator:
The Utility Arm, as seen by 67
-67's Utility Arm allowed them to acquire balls, go over the bump, and manipulate the bridge. This arm would push the bridge down with little effort.
-The utility arm was built to be robust, so 67 would always be capable of manipulating the bridge. It could quickly and easily push the bridge down to allow 67 to drive on smoothly.
Bump Crossing:
Large Pneumatic Wheels, as seen by 1114 and 2056 and many others
-These teams use large pneumatic wheels in their drive systems, which allowed to simply drive over the bump, quick and easy, forward or backward.
-By relying on the type of wheels they used, these teams had a passive device that worked every time, no failure. This gave them more time to work on other robot functions and gave them and even more robust design.
Drop-Down castor wheels, as seen on 254, 971, 111 and others
-This system consists of a caster wheels (or set of wheels) on the bottom of the robot that pop out, lifting the front of the robot high enough for the front wheels to drive on the barrier.
-This system worked well because it allowed teams to just activate the wheels, and then drive their robot right over the bump, quick and smooth.
Bridge Balancing Aid (i.e. Stinger, etc.):
FRC1986, The Teeter-Totter Talons
-1986 had a pair of pneumatically powered 'talons' that would push down and aid in the balancing of the bridge.
-With the aid of the talons, 1986 could not only push up on the bridge to even it out, but they could even brace the bridge from falling. Quick and effective. With the addition of the Twin Tucking Tabs, 1986 was a balancing machine.
Four Bar Linkage, as seen by 33, 469 and others
-The four bar linkage is a simple balancing system, in which a mechanism made up of a series of bars is pushed down, lifting up the bridge.
-This system is slightly more complex than the drop down piston, but is considered more effective because the device can reach outside the robot's frame perimeter.
Drop down Piston, as seen by 148, 2056, 1114, 2337 and others
-The drop down piston is simply an air cylinder with a piston-mounted Caster wheel (or some other type of wheel that can roll in multiple direction) that pushes the robot (and as a result, the bridge) up, and allows the robot using it to continue driving to complete the balance.
-This is a much simpler method than the 4-bar linkage, but not viewed as as effective since the robot is limited to having it within their bumpers, reducing how much they are able to drive onto the bridge with it deployed. Still, this design has proven very effective to many teams, and has resulted in the first ever triple balance (by 148), and many thereafter.
I think this covers many of the updates. As always, if I made a mistake, let me know.