View Single Post
  #14   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-20-2010, 11:33 AM
JesseK's Avatar
JesseK JesseK is offline
Expert Flybot Crasher
FRC #1885 (ILITE)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Reston, VA
Posts: 3,608
JesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond repute
Re: If you could Breakaway all over again...

Moving forward, we will simply realize the talent we have and try to reorganize where appropriate. Case study from lessons learned:
With a Mecanum setup, kickers on 2 sides seemed like a great idea...
  • A power kicker facing backwards would allow the driver to maintain a 'facing away' orientation when in the far field. The idea here was to keep the driver's natural tendencies natural (i.e. not 'flip' turn directions when facing the wrong way) while far across the field. This theoretically would have allowed us to line up faster. This kicker never made it to full fruition due to a week of snow.
  • A medium kicker that allowed us to play midfield or close field. This one was successful.
  • The trade-off was to forgo hanging.
  • (side note) Karthik probably would not have approved since we were planning to play all 3 zones. Coincidentally with DC being a Week 1 regional in 2010 and a variety of skill-leveled teams in attendance, we wound up having to play all 3 zones. I only mention that because a student mentioned it to me in Atlanta.

With a Mecanum setup, side rollers for the balls on the wall also seemed very viable; coincidentally that would have been unique and allowed us to easily win DC.
  • The 5th Gear Simulation revealed that most balls wound up along a wall. Early in competition we found that those that barely missed the goal would roll out directly in front of the goal; if they were not hit just right, usually they'd end up on the side wall.
  • The choice was made to handle balls on the wall.
  • A side roller that ran the length of the robot side could be strafed up to and run in the direction of the goal.
  • The difference was poor execution because our best builders were either on FTC (new to the team) or on Build 2 (parents of new kids) with the field elements, bumpers, and general build supervision.
The strategy and direction was solid; we missed the boat though.

Moving forward, more individual components need to be simulated: especially any complex ones. Naturally-articulated drive seemed like a great idea, but also caused some headache due to its tendency to pop up the front of the robot when accelerating. It wasn't the worst decision or outcome, but I wonder what things would have been like with a rigid pneumatic-wheel drive.
__________________

Drive Coach, 1885 (2007-present)
CAD Library Updated 5/1/16 - 2016 Curie/Carver Industrial Design Winner
GitHub

Last edited by JesseK : 09-20-2010 at 11:37 AM.
Reply With Quote