Quote:
Originally Posted by sumadin
That team was 473 from Montana. Additionally, we also built a shooter. There's at least one match where everything worked well. Unfortunately, a pot on our grabber broke on Saturday, rendering us rather ineffective. Thanks to Eugene Brooks and team 1280, we got it fixed before eliminations, but unfortunately we weren't selected.
We'll be coming full force to San Jose (first time ever we have competed before San Jose) and we'll be ready to go.
|
My apologies to 473 for the numbering error, and also to team 8 for not listing you as a "shooter". I did not list your machine as a "shooter" not because I forgot it (it is a very cool design and hard to forget), but rather because it struck me as more of a hybrid "shooter/arm" mechanism. I tend to classify shooters as those that pick up the ball and hold it inside their original starting dimensions and then launch using a relatively short but speedy mechanism, kind of like 1726 and 118, to use some commonly referenced examples. I saw your design when it was working well, and it looked really good but wasn't sure whether to count it as a "pure shooter" because I didn't know if the robot could work as an "arm-bot" for lifting the ball over or poking balls off as well. (Not that pure shooters can't knock balls down, but typically they don't use their shooting mechanism to do it.)
Jason