|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
| View Poll Results: Is a turret the best way to go for Rebound Rumble? | |||
| Yes |
|
174 | 68.77% |
| No |
|
79 | 31.23% |
| Voters: 253. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Poll: Turrets for Rebound Rumble
What is your opinion on using a rotating turret for this year's game? How far should it turn? How would you use it?
*This is for my own curiosity, and will not effect 256's decision making process* |
|
#2
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Poll: Turrets for Rebound Rumble
We felt that the ability to score with any robot orientation is important especially since the number of balls is fewer than we'd like. It is easier to pick up a ball and go for another one and still be able to shoot. We think the benefits outweighs the complexity.
|
|
#3
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Poll: Turrets for Rebound Rumble
We considered this, and actually did it for Aim High, but it adds weight, complexity, and doesn't add any features we can't do with drivetrain. Yeah, I guess we can't drive sideways and shoot, but if we're touching the key, defense will be a challenge. So we stop, turn and aim. Last edited by DonRotolo : 23-01-2012 at 21:55. Reason: Meh, someone beat me to it. |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Poll: Turrets for Rebound Rumble
Well, we decided that it is too risky to shoot form afar, so we are already lining up with the fender, and it should not be a problem.
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Poll: Turrets for Rebound Rumble
Quote:
Back on topic, the turret adds a huge amount of complexity and complication in design where it would not have been before. 90% of that functionality can be done by moving the drive train. |
|
#6
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Poll: Turrets for Rebound Rumble
Here's something one of our members put together showing the relationship between distance and accuracy.
![]() I will leave it to others to determine if a turret is necessary, but the precision required to sink shots from long distances is substantial. It may be possible that hitting the backboard and bouncing balls in will be more forgiving. We don't yet have good data on that. |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Poll: Turrets for Rebound Rumble
The key doesnt start at 12 feet it starts at 101 inches, which is less than 9ft.
|
|
#8
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Poll: Turrets for Rebound Rumble
True enough; though the rest of the information is correct. Teams will need to aim with high precision for long shots. I think folks are grossly underestimating the difficulty involved here.
|
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Poll: Turrets for Rebound Rumble
We are adding a turret for two reasons:
If either of those things weren't true, I would support a non-turreted shooter for my team. We just did well last time with a COTS lazy susan type bearing setup that we're refining for 2012. There's rarely a question of "best" in FRC. There is only "best for your team". That said, a turret for many ball shooters is a decision with a much lower opportunity cost than, say, a swerve drive. Thus you will likely see turrets at the top of play no matter what. |
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Poll: Turrets for Rebound Rumble
There are many factors that go into whether or not building a turret is the "best" strategy for this game.
1. Prior experience with turrets (off-season or previous years). 2. Whether you can get the desired precision with the drivetrain. 3. Motor allocation. 4. Time taken for iteration and development. We ultimately decided against the turret due to several of these factors (one of which has yet to be determined). It comes down to realistically looking at what you can achieve, and what resources you are willing to allocate to achieve it. For us a turret may have been achievable, but it would require allocating more of our resources than we were willing to use in it's development. Whether or not this puts us at a competitive disadvantage is yet to be seen, but it is less likely to put us at a huge disadvantage compared to attempting to do more than we realistically can. |
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Poll: Turrets for Rebound Rumble
Quote:
...and accuracy at close range is better than innaccuracy at long range (except for certain feederbot applications). |
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Poll: Turrets for Rebound Rumble
If you don't have your design down at this point and you read one sentence on Chief Delphi, read this one.
|
|
#13
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Poll: Turrets for Rebound Rumble
Our turret so far. The plywood disc sits on a 6" lazy susan bearing. The ball is fed from the side. The shooter sits on top of this. The turret only moves a little bit, like 45 degrees. The belt is screwed to the wood disc. The pulley on the gearmotor had it's hole opened up to 10mm to fit the gearmotor shaft. Design calls for about one second to move 45 degrees, so we have about an 8:1 ratio, with the roughly 1 rev/second gearmotor.
|
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Poll: Turrets for Rebound Rumble
Quote:
|
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Poll: Turrets for Rebound Rumble
Quote:
Quote:
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|