Quote:
Originally Posted by wireties
Why are folks assuming a robot that can limbo cannot cross other defenses as well? I understand, a little, why a low-rider may have trouble opening doors, lowering bridges or raising the portcullis but why would a low-rider have trouble with the other defenses? The low bar is not so low that it impacts wheel size choices. drive train choices etc.
|
I agree (being low actually makes many of these easier). But many people are justifying their choice to do the low bar by saying "you don't even have to do anything special to the drivetrain!" Either you haven't done anything special to your drive, in which case you're going to have a hard time with the other defenses, or you have, in which case the point is moot, you've taken the time/effort to cross other defenses anyways.
I would assume for many reasons in my earlier post. There are going to be a lot of teams that will fail to meet their potential in other aspects of the game in pursuit of the low bar, and as a result, won't be able to gain enough from doing the low bar for it to be worth the design tradeoffs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrForbes
Why? We have room for a nice size electronics board, mounted near the top of the robot...easy access, etc. It took our electronics team about an hour to mount the parts and do the preliminary wiring.
|
This was not our experience, and I know of many teams sharing in our pain. There are factors that don't apply to all teams (in our case, significant amounts of space dedicated to boulder pathways, and being unable to afford to do the whole robot on Talon SRXs). I've seen worse, but there will be a lot of cramped boards this year.