Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber
Thank you.
Why is it I just find these older robots so well designed and engineered? What were those arms made of? Looks like 2x1.
Sorry for all the questions but this is a very slick looking robot and it looks like something I can learn a lot from.
|
a big reason was one of their engineers donald tarca.... another huge reason was there was no autonomous so you didn't have to split time and build two robots to be competitive
It was 2X1 alum (unlike the steel frame they made in 2000). Roger's post was pretty on the money other than the fall. 267 relied on their track system that was still in contact with the ground while vertical. Their driver just drove it to initiate the fall (pre-autonomous) and when they fell over in the beginning of the match I believe there was a pneumatic cylinder on the bottom (not visible in these photos) that absorbed the energy from the fall.
The tail primarily acted as a counter balance for the weight of the goal. I cannot remember exactly but it was less than 100lbs. Without any balls in the goal it was pretty light from what I remember, but with the balls it became much heavier. I never saw them use it to reset the bridge, but I'll take Roger at his word.
One of the most interesting things to their design was if they were assisted by another robot they could place both goals on the bridge while going back for their end zone bonus (something few could do, and even fewer could do consistently which is what made 71 so dominant)
oh and the pneumatics powered the goals up and down, but if you look carefully you'll also see a gas shock in support