View Single Post
  #29   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 05-11-2013, 10:25
MrForbes's Avatar
MrForbes MrForbes is offline
Registered User
AKA: Jim
FRC #1726 (N.E.R.D.S.)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Sierra Vista AZ
Posts: 6,038
MrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Optical sensors getting tricked

Quote:
Originally Posted by antimatter_john View Post
Only problem with this is that mechanical problems are harder to fix at competition. At competition it is much quicker to fix a sensor or fix a peice of code than it is a mechanical part. Though if I may ask what sensor have the mechanical parts replaced?
Huh, we have spent a lot of time at competitions trying to get electronic stuff working, and failed. Mechanicals are easy to fix....maybe because I'm a mechanical engineer, with 30+ yrs experience fixing stuff. I guess it's not what it's made of, it's what you know?

Our Ultimate Ascent robot was designed to not require sensors, it just does it's thing based on it's design. Autonomous just requires the robot to be placed where it belongs, and it shoots into the goal. Shooting during a match works by driving the robot into position and shooting...position being determined by parking the robot against the pyramid. Angles and positions are fixed by design, and the actuation is pneumatic, it's either up or down, no "in between" positions that would require sensor feedback to control.

We've spend days, make that weeks, trying to get sensors to deliver useful information to control robots over the years, and generally failed miserably at it.