As a preface, our robot played zero defense. I hated teams playing defense against our machine - it was very effective. However, it's part of the game. Getting hit from the side, having arms fight one another during capping, and being rammed on the 6" platform were obvious implications of this years game. I'd like to comment on some of Ken's remarks.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KenWittlief
I defy anyone to build a bot that can lift the 2X ball up into the air and cap the stationary goal that is not vunerable to being knocked over, seriously - it cant be done.
and the rules state that 'any strategy aimed solely towards tipping... is not allowed'. But Ive seen match after match where this happened, so I dont see how anyone can say, we only intended to push them sideways, we expected there wheels to skid sideways and the bot to NOT fall over, but for some reason it fell over.
|
Ken, I'm not a practicing engineer, but I've taken a simple class on static bodies. Any size robot can be tipped over if you push from a height tall enough with enough force to cause the moment force about it's edge to be greater than it's weight.
My point is that, most robots do indeed push from the floor, perhaps 2 - 8 inches above the ground. Robots can be pushed sideways safely, just like you can push a bottle of coke across the table when you push on its base, or it can tipped if you try to put it over at the top.
<R10> Teams are expected to design and build robots to withstand vigorous interaction with other robots.
I believe that being pushed from the side isn't vigorous... it's defense. If you don't want to get tipped over when hit from the side.. you have a few options. You can have wheels with low traction, lower the machines center of gravity, use casters that will cause the robot to pivot instead of turn. I think the major problem that teams had this year is using big wheels. Because they were using bigger wheels, their effect wheel base was smaller, causing them to be much more prone to tipping.
There are engineering choices every year that each team needs to decide for themselves. How to avoiding being tip-prone is one of them.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KenWittlief
if thats the way the game is played now in FIRST, why bother trying to cap or score points?
all those teams who lost out after being knocked over, or who could not continue to play due to severe damage - what have they learned this year?
|
Isn't it obvious? You don't get 50 points for tipping a robot, you get 50 points for hanging on the bar. You need to build an arm so you can do so.
Hopefully teams that had problems tipping learned that having a lower center of gravity is critical to ensure that you're stable. I also hope teams have learned that if you're going to have a big bad arm, you better design it such that you can pick yourself up - you look really dopey if you don't.
In conclussion, I think that there are a lot of defensive plays that people can do effectively. I think that repeated ramming isn't effective or gracious, but I think that engaging machine robots when they are prone to weaknesses is fair game, ESPECIALLY in the finals. FIRST is a competition, and tipping, though potentially devestating, has been and always will be part of the game. Well prepared teams should be able sustain vigerous interactions.
Matt