View Single Post
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-07-2010, 09:43
Jeffy's Avatar
Jeffy Jeffy is offline
Retired, for now
AKA: Jeff Gier
FRC #2410 (Metal Mustang Robotics) #159 (Alpine Robotics)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: Fort Collins
Posts: 523
Jeffy has a brilliant futureJeffy has a brilliant futureJeffy has a brilliant futureJeffy has a brilliant futureJeffy has a brilliant futureJeffy has a brilliant futureJeffy has a brilliant futureJeffy has a brilliant futureJeffy has a brilliant futureJeffy has a brilliant futureJeffy has a brilliant future
Re: Just a Robotics Question (need ideas from the smarts)

Well, Pincers, grabbers, crushers, ect. don't really use kinectic energy much of an advantage, so hydraylics or a linear actuator could work just as well. From my experiance with combat robots, the weight restriction is very much more difficult than it is in first. With that said, I would go with the simplest mechanism and use a linear actuator.

Head the above posts. One small suggestion: Robots have large varieties in shapes and widths, however, their is a much smaller variation in height and most combat robot tops are flat or close to it. This would give an advantage to an overhead crusher.

I have been out of combat robots too long to remember the name of the robot I am thinking of, but it was the only semi-sucessful crusher that I have ever heard of. It believe it was a Canadian bot, and either a 1 kilo or 3lb robot. (my expertise is in small parts and robots, sorry)
__________________
Metal Mustang Robotics 2410 (2008-2011)
2008 STL Rookie All-Star
2010 GKC Finalists
2010 OKC Champions
Alpine Robotics 159 (2012-)
2012 CO Finalists

700 miles from home, 2 miles from FRC. Life is good.