View Single Post
  #44   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-01-2016, 21:32
coachm's Avatar
coachm coachm is offline
Coach
FRC #3865 (Riley Robotics)
Team Role: Coach
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: Indiana
Posts: 19
coachm will become famous soon enough
Re: High Goal Vs. Low Goal

Quote:
Originally Posted by philso View Post
I think that the feeling of many here on CD is that several of the Defenses (the ones with no moving parts) might be defeated with proper drivetrain design so that might get rid of at least one of your mechanisms.

The Low Bar doesn't move either and you either go under it or over it. There is another thread here discussing the robot geometry required to go under it.

Perhaps your team can make cardboard mockups of the Defenses with moving parts and play with different concepts to see if you can reduce the number of mechanisms further. These would not even have to be full-sized. It would be a lot faster than building them following the drawings then finding that you might not have any ideas that are promising.

The following video might give you some ideas too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJREahxuy4Q
Thanks! I agree that a properly researched drivetrain, and ruggedly constructed 'bot will readily knock out 4 of the obstacles. We're kind of thinking 10" wheels - help get up over the wall in particular. Team Indiana on ri3d used the tank treads and they're bouncing all over the place. I am worried about securing the ball. A third row of wheels (not powered necessarily) might help with the cheval de frise, preventing the middle plank from swinging back up to catch the undercarriage and trap the 'bot - just something to be in contact with the ramp and hold it down while we drive over it. That one will take a model, we're building it tomorrow evening, I think. Unfortunately, it's final exams this week so our kids are a little split in their focus. Stupid school schedule, really. Finals AFTER winter hols? What a dumb idea.