Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Corsetto
If I understand correctly, asid61's stated hypothesis is this: limiting speed reduces competitiveness.
In the context of Aerial Assist, I agree with this. I believe our speed on the field was a component of our success this season.
All aboard the California powerhouse hype train. Next stop, Einstein 2015 
-Mike |
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamHeard
Chooo Chooo!
I think it's fair to argue for 95+% of teams the difference between a 16fps high gear and a 20+ fps high gear is not what will make them more competitive.
Gearing that high requires a higher attention to detail mechanically, as well as a good supply of batteries. Many teams don't realise their batteries are in bad shape because their robots simply don't use that much juice.
|
I would challenge the notion that a smaller gear ratio will always result in a quicker robot on the field. We did some modeling a couple years ago and found that because of the tradeoff of top speed and acceleration, 16 to 16.5fps free speed with two CIMS and full weight robot is fastest for a half field distance. Our thinking is that for most games, it is rare that you can have an uninterrupted run across the length of the field, and that having top speed here is not worth trading off performance during shorter runs.
We ran this speed last year and were keeping up gamewise with those geared faster. This could be because 2014 game play ended up being much further from an open field than it looked like, but I think another reason to not lose sight of is that once your robot is fast enough, it is more important how it is driven than what the exact speed. Our driver gets a lot of practice, and a fundamental of what we practice is how to accomplish whatever needed in the most efficient means possible.