|
Re: Continuous Floor Loading?
What you are calling "continuous" systems have been the best choice for the majority of FIRST games, because they by nature can be faster and reduce the need for precision and driver skill. If you can build a quality one, it will generally perform better in the long run.
Hybrid systems like 118 2011 are designed to overcome a discrepancy in the conditions between how an object must be gathered versus how it is released. In many cases, this difference can be lack of precision desired as a quality for pickup, with high precision being required for release in a pick and place game. Other examples include carefully controlled feeding (most games that involve shooters), or speed (movable jaw roller claws in 2011 for fast release). When such conditions are not in place, it's just needless complexity.
Non-continuous intake solutions have limited utility. Looking back on FIRST history, the only game where I would consider a passive or actuated intake to be indisputably optimal over a continuous one would be 1992, where the sheer number and density of balls made scoop pickups an effective solution. They've been made to work by many great teams in several games since, but very few designs beat the driver friendly nature of a roller based intake. They're often a much better choice for human loaded elements, but you asked about floor loading specifically.
__________________
FIRST is not about doing what you can with what you know. It is about doing what you thought impossible, with what you were inspired to become.
2007-2010: Student, FRC 1687, Highlander Robotics
2012-2014: Technical Mentor, FRC 1687, Highlander Robotics
2015-2016: Lead Mentor, FRC 5400, Team WARP
2016-???: Volunteer and freelance mentor-for-hire
Last edited by Joe G. : 16-08-2014 at 22:51.
|