Quote:
Originally Posted by Eldarion
As a programmer, I am very disappointed by the lack of emphasis FIRST placed on autonomous. 2 points is something that can be gotten far easier by making the arm a little faster, playing a little better defense, etc.
|
I'm also the team programmer and we didn't bother to even THINK about the emphasis on autonomous. We used it to drive the team to implement a controllable, reproducible, reliable tube handling mechanism. That enabled autonomous scoring but truly benefited the operator-initiated robot operation even more.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eldarion
Also, a little note as to the rack. There are several times when the rack was moved such that both lights were out of the field of view of the camera. There probably should have been lights above all 8 columns, not just the four columns. This would also have allowed semi-automatic scoring during manual mode, and may once again have increased the number of ringers and spoilers placed on the rack.
|
Our experience is that you will ALWAYS see at least ONE light if you point your robot at the center of the playfield. If you look straight down the side, you might not see any, but if you angle the initial placement towards the center of the field, no matter how they translated or rotated the rack, at least one light would be visible. But then, we also changed the lens on our camera to a 90 degree wider angle.
I disagree with 8 lights making it easier. That would have just made more cases with multiple lights in view which (at least in our implementation) is a much more difficult autonomous situation to solve.
As for semi-automatic scoring in manual mode, I'm going to go public with a hint from Team 386 for the upcoming Central Florida Regional. Just a single word, EasySCORE (tm). Watch for us at UCF!
Lynn (D) - Team Voltage 386