pic: Chief Delphi (#47)

[CD47-Bot]

loading photo ...

[Rich Wong]

Excellent Idea- lifting the robot up, and retracking the arms after hooking?

Are those re-enforcement plates behind each wheel I see?

BTW- You had time for TWO BOTS! wow.

[Joe Johnson]

Originally Posted by Rich Wong

Excellent Idea- lifting the robot up, and retracking the arms after hooking?

Actually, we don't need to use these ramps/bumpers for hanging. In this picture, the robot is more or less in its "debug" mode where be can run the wheel motors without driving around.

Although, it DOES give us a capability to reach an extra 8 inches or so. Perhaps it will allow us to reach the bar from different parts of the field? Who's to say... ;-)

Originally Posted by Rich Wong

Are those re-enforcement plates behind each wheel I see?

Those are the sprockets behind the wheels.

Originally Posted by Rich Wong

BTW- You had time for TWO BOTS! wow.

As to 2 robots, I have said elsewhere that FIRST has forced teams that want to be competitive during autonomy to build two. This is why I think autonomy is a bad idea, but FIRST has its reasons.

Joe J.

[Descartes]

I dunno. We had probably the best autonomous at Nationals last year, at least until the last match. We never had the time or cash to build two robots. We just don't use crazy complicated autonomous coding.

[Joe Johnson]

Originally Posted by Descartes

...We had probably the best autonomous at Nationals last year...

Wasn't at Houston last year, so I can't comment with first hand knowledge, but I don't think that this statement would hold up to a popular vote of those that were there.

More importantly, my continued point is not that teams cannot possibly make a competitive robot with out making two robots, IT IS POSSIBLE. Is it likely? I think not.

Here is an analogy: Is it possible that a team than uses nothing but wood and glue for their robot makes a competitive robot? Yes, it is possible. Is it as likely to as a team with assess to aluminum and welding? Definitely not.

I mean no insult to teams that don't build a second robot. My point is that FIRST needs to really think about what they are doing with the autonomous mode. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting. I would guess that prior to last year, fewer than 1 team in 20 made a substantially identical 2nd robot. Last year, I suppose that number jumped to something like 1 in 10. This year, I suppose that number is closer to 1 in 5.

I cannot stress enough how strongly I feel that this is not good for FIRST in the long run. It is a waste of resources, it stretches out the season, it wears out the worker bees on the teams and it adds very little if anything to the mission of FIRST.

Autonomous mode should be removed. There I said it and I am not sorry.

Joe J.

[Tyler Olds]

Originally Posted by Joe Johnson

Wasn't at Houston last year, so I can't comment with first hand knowledge, but I don't think that this statement would hold up to a popular vote of those that were there..........

........Autonomous mode should be removed. There I said it and I am not sorry.

Joe J.

Very good post Joe:

First off, I believe that a couple other teams had a pretty good auto mode (if you have seen 111's you would know what I mean).

I am personally against auto mode my self. This puts rookie teams at a disadvantage because it is just another variable that they have to worry about.

It also can make those first 15 sec pretty boring to watch. Last year at regionals I would say 1 in 2 teams didn't have an auto mode (though I would expect a better ratio this year).

Also this can set the teams who have the best engineers in the world apart from teams who have no engineers or whose engineers are not skilled in that field. Once again I am going to relate to Wildstang. Their auto mode was incredible, however there was no way that our team could have done something like that last year.

To get back on subject, those "stilts" that you have are a very versitle tool that will give you a huge advantage, great job!

[Joe Johnson]

I really am an idiot some times...

I am sorry, I really need to try to contain myself. I would just delete my comments about autonomous mode, but since they can be interpreted as painting a less than flattering picture of myself, I would feel sort of like a cheater by removing them -- leaving them up is sort of like doing penance.

Here is the thing: I should not have brought up my opposition to autonomous mode AGAIN and certainly not in this thread.

If you feel compelled to continue the topic, I will not stop you, but I ask that you please start a new thread on the topic rather than continuing it in this thread. Feel free to "quote" my text but let's keep in in another thread.

Actually, I propose that we just let the thing dye until after the Championships in Atlanta. As for myself, I will try to contain myself until then, unless provoked, I will just let it go.

Sorry again.

Many regrets,

Joe J.

[Dima]

ok lets see

looks like you decided to not use any pneumatics this year.

2 atwoods for the drivetrain
2 drills for the arm. one to move it up and down the "main post" the other to rotate it (with help of surgucal tubing?)
1 vandoor to rotate the "stilt" made out of diamond plate

I like the "stilts" one to lift the front up the 1' platform and the other to life the back and roll untill the robot is mostly up on the platform

the rest a guesses

it does look like from the pictures that you have a second vandoor to move the "stilt" on the side of the ball mecanism. But I didnt think that a second vandoor was allowed so i am probably wrong on that

ether 2 Globe motors or 2 FP's to open,close the claw (by having 2 you are able to move across the bar while hanging)

whatever is left for the ball mechanism.

Very surprized that the ball chute/tube doesnt extend up any higher (or does it? )

all in all looks like a very nice robot, with quite a few capabilities. Looking foward to seeing it in person in San Jose

[Korbin]

It looks like the middle pair of wheels are a bit lower, am I seeing that right?

[Dima]

ofcourse it is that makes the robot turn without bouncing, kingman and cheesypoofs did the same thing.

i think that supporting the wheels just on one side should be the trend from now on, saves weight and makes for a larger footprint

[Josh Fritsch]

Team 27 also did the same thing. By putting the center wheels down about 1/16-1/8 inch below the rest, it allows for "on a dime" turning ability. This allows the front/rear wheels "teater" on the center wheel making the friction to the floor from the other wheels as minimal as possible.

[FadyS.]

Originally Posted by CD47-Bot

Thread created automatically to discuss this image in the Picture Gallery.

Wow, that looks identical to the mechanism we're using to lift our bot up. After we grap the bar, we just retract the legs!

EDIT: I read that you're not using those to boost you up, but yea, that's what we are doing for our bot.