2002 Robot Design

[ehfeinberg]

This is going way back all the way to the 2002 game, Zone Zeal.

I came across of a forgotten picture of our team's robot in 2002.
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/img...1ed4bc0a_l.jpg

What caught my attention was what I found in the front and back of the robot. I realized that the robot started vertical and then fell forwards to have a longer drive base. (You can see the curved back plate on the left side of the picture and the rubber pneumatic brake which slowed the impact with the floor on the right side of the picture.)

I know 71 had a very similar design, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAmAnkYDUQM but were their a lot of robots like this, or were 71 and 449 the only ones?

[techtiger1]

67 in 2004 and 2005.

[Akash Rastogi]

16 in 2008

[mwmac]

2122 in 2008

[ehfeinberg]

Does anyone know who the initial team was to come up with this? Was this change in orientation prominent before the 2002 season?

I see why this technique could not be used in 2009, but what stopped it from happening in 2010-2012?

[BrendanB]

There were others as mentioned above. In recent years, rules about starting configuration and game configuration have changed making 'flot bots' illegal.

[gyroscopeRaptor]

Originally Posted by BrendanB

There were others as mentioned above. In recent years, rules about starting configuration and game configuration have changed making 'flot bots' illegal.

What other rules have directly resulted from robots or teams?

[BrendanB]

Originally Posted by gyroscopeRaptor

What other rules have directly resulted from robots or teams?

I'm sure there are numerous rules that have resulted from teams in a gray area. Whether or not FIRST created those rules to make flop bots illegal or it was just part of the game is another story.

[Cory]

No metal contacting carpet was a change that was obviously in response to a number of teams in 2002 with metal cleats/treads/spikes/etc.

[mwmac]

Originally Posted by Cory

No metal contacting carpet was a change that was obviously in response to a number of teams in 2002 with metal cleats/treads/spikes/etc.

No more filecards...

[Travis Hoffman]

Originally Posted by mwmac

No more filecards...

No more of these either...
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/13515

Also, flippy-floppy:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/14204

And just because it's 2002, and I'm nostalgic:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/13459

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Travis Hoffman

And just because it's 2002, and I'm nostalgic:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/13459

One of the most effective machines out there, and it only gets a "just because"???

60's strategy was simple: drop a tether at the start of the match (I think it was shock-corded segments) and go racing out to grab two goals and drag them into their scoring area. That's when the fun began. They'd lift both goals, increasing their total weight to something like 490 lbs--try breaking traction with that! Then when someone tried to push one of the goals back into the neutral zone, or to their own zone, the merry-go-round started turning. And turning. And turning. For the rest of the match--or until whoever it was got bored and went to bug someone else, like whoever had the third goal. The human players would then let fly, if a robot didn't load the goals first, and try to score a few.

Also, look closely--that's not a WCD, but WCD was at least loosely based on that drive and came out as WCD two years later when 60 and 254 collaborated.

[jspatz1]

Originally Posted by gyroscopeRaptor

What other rules have directly resulted from robots or teams?

Allowing only one solenoid valve to feed each air cylinder/actuator. In 2009 we fed our catapult cylinders with 2 parallel valves per cylinder. The inspectors REALLY did not like it and nearly DQ'ed us, but it did not violate any written rule. The following year they added the one valve = one cylinder rule, so we refer to it as the Titanium Rule, but there have probably been other teams which have done it.

[Justin Montois]

340 in 2005.

[PAR_WIG1350]

I played around with the idea of a rebound rumble flop-bot. The frame would have been hinged and it would have folded to take up less space on the bridge. It would have started with the frame folded and everything on the upper frame would fit within the footprint of the lower frame satisfying the frame perimeter with the lower frame defining the frame perimeter. when it folded down, the upper frame would remain within the allowed envelope for deployed mechanisms and would have given us the same wheelbase and configuration as our final design, which was wide robot with four 12" pneumatic wheels. Unfortunately, the penalty, in weight and complexity, was too much given our resources.