[Jaine Perotti]

The decision to turret or not to turret depends on the design of each individual robot.

My team decided that we would like to turret because it would allow us more precise manipulation of the tetras. It also gave us greater freedom to cap from different positions relative to the goals. We won't have to realign our robot if we approach a goal in such a way that we would ordinarily not be able to score any tetras. Instead, we can utilize our turreting mechanism, and spend less time trying to align the robot's base in the correct position.

This is especially beneficial to our robot because of the jumpiness we experience when turning. We decided to use a high traction, four wheel drive system for a strong pushing ability. However, there are always trade offs in mechanical design, so we sacrificed the ability to make smooth turns. If we were to rely on the reorientation of the drive base to cap a tetra, we would have a very difficult time getting the tetra to align properly. This is where the smooth turning action of a turret makes life alot easier for our operator and driver, and saves time.

However, different robots may not require the use of a turret to position themselves to score. Other robots may turn smoother, or move quicker, to make up for the lack of the mobility of a turret. So in the end, it all comes down to what a team decides is the right design for them. This year, it seems that most teams have not designed a turreting system for their tetra manipulators. This could be because they have compensated for the lack of mobility elsewhere in their design, they have decided to sacrifice mobility to keep their arm simpler, or they simply may not have come to the conclusion that a turret would be a necessity in the first place. It is a preference that is determined by many different variables, relating to the chosen design and strategical objectives of each team.