Going for 3 robots on Ramp?

[Mr. Pockets]

BenjDragon: You don't happen to know off hand the width of the bridge do you (as in 88" by what)?

EDIT: Nevermind, I found it. For reference, the bridges are 88" long by 48" wide.

[karomata]

A fellow mentor and I were looking at this problem on a scale model field. it is completely possible to put 3 robots on, the trick is about the process of actually getting them on. teams that would wish to be able to easily do this would need more advanced drivetrains and drivebases (nona, mecanum, wide drive, emperor swerve). it would also require extreme communication between driveteams.
Some people are saying that the chances of seeing 3 robots on a ramp is kind of like seeing a robot hang off of another hanging robot in 2010.

[3v3rnoob]

I don't think that my last comment was totally understood. Imagine trying to move a bookcase down some stairs with two other people. One person is lowest down the stairs, the other person is highest, and the person in the middle is trying to keep the whole thing from tipping. Now imagine trying to do this with one of those people with their mouth and ears taped shut. That's what balancing the robots is going to be like.

It doesn't matter how much you talk about it before the match, there is going to be a lot of minor adjustments made after you get the robots on the ramp, much like moving a heavy object, and not being able to communicate easily with all parties involved is going to make that difficult.

Of course you should talk with your alliance partners before the match about how each robot will be oriented on the ramp should you go for the three robot balance. The problem is going to be the actually doing the balancing.

[Bob Steele]

Originally Posted by 3v3rnoob

I don't think that my last comment was totally understood. Imagine trying to move a bookcase down some stairs with two other people. One person is lowest down the stairs, the other person is highest, and the person in the middle is trying to keep the whole thing from tipping. Now imagine trying to do this with one of those people with their mouth and ears taped shut. That's what balancing the robots is going to be like.

It doesn't matter how much you talk about it before the match, there is going to be a lot of minor adjustments made after you get the robots on the ramp, much like moving a heavy object, and not being able to communicate easily with all parties involved is going to make that difficult.

Of course you should talk with your alliance partners before the match about how each robot will be oriented on the ramp should you go for the three robot balance. The problem is going to be the actually doing the balancing.

I have to respectfully disagree with this.
If we think back 5 years to the ramps... one robot was getting set up for the lift before the other robots... at the very end the other two robots would rush to climb the ramps...

This year a single robot could be preparing the ramp... perhaps holding it up on one end while on the ramp... the other robots would only need to climb onto the ramp and then the prep robot would let go and do any balancing necessary ...(in fact, given the inherent stability of this particular ramp...(videos show that a 28 lb load 22 inches from the fulcrum still balances the bridge...) I think that the balancing portion will be fairly easy...

I think a balance in this situation is definitely doable in 5-10 seconds (after a robot has prepped the bridge...

So the scenario would be: one robot travels to the bridge (alliance side) while its partners are taking their last shots on the scoring side. The prep robot climbs on... lifts the bridge underneath it (somehow)...and the bridge is tipped to the scoring side... 10 seconds to go... the other robots run to the ramp...climb on... the prep robot takes out the support... and

BAZINGA!!!! 40 points...

also remember that the rules committee is ALREADY thinking about adding points at CMP...and the points are PER ROBOT...so with a 5 point boost at CMP PER ROBOT.... that would mean a 55 point balance score for 3 ...
with the max swing of points... it would mean 15 PER ROBOT.... or 85 points for a 3 robot balance...

think about it...

The "prep" robot can be practicing the entire time... even during the qualifying rounds by using this method to get cooperation points..or regular ramp points.... the other alliance robots only have to drive up the ramp so ANY robot on the field should be able to do that...

REMEMBER
We were told that to win this competition we would have to cooperate...
Is this the GDC's way of rewarding cooperation during eliminations? I think so.. and the higher the competition... the more value for the cooperation...

CMP would showcase coopertition and cooperation within an alliance during elimination...

hmmmmmm

[c385]

Originally Posted by Ninja_Bait

That is true. I was hoping someone had figured it out, but I also forgot that CD is not the GDC. (Otherwise we'd be better at getting the game hints! )

Yeah, let me know if you get a response on Q&A. I was wondering about this also

[Mr. Pockets]

Originally Posted by karomata

Some people are saying that the chances of seeing 3 robots on a ramp is kind of like seeing a robot hang off of another hanging robot in 2010.

Eh, not quite. In 2010, robots had to be built in a way that would allow someone else to hang on them, while correctly predicting the hanging apparatus of their teammates. There are a ton of unknown variables there.

This year that isn't quite as true. Most bots can be predicted to be roughly 120 lbs (its strategically a good reason to aim for the weight limit even if you don't need to otherwise), they have set size parameters that many people will probably fit, and only one robot technically has to be able to drop the ramp so to speak. This invites a lot more potential then 2010.

[briahna :)]

Originally Posted by lineskier

Personally I think a great strategy for a rookie team would be to design a very short light weight robot that others could drive on top of. During qualification rounds you could pick up a competitor and always get 2 coopertition points, and then in the elimination rounds it would make balancing 3 easier. I'd love to see a team win it all never shooting a basketball

Wouldn't that be violating G27 since it would be "deliberate... contact with an opponent robot inside its frame perimeter..." and don't both robots have to be supported by the bridge for it to counted as balanced?

[Mr. Pockets]

Originally Posted by briahna :)

don't both robots have to be supported by the bridge for it to counted as balanced?

Correct

Originally Posted by lineskier

Personally I think a great strategy for a rookie team would be to design a very short light weight robot that others could drive on top of. During qualification rounds you could pick up a competitor and always get 2 coopertition points, and then in the elimination rounds it would make balancing 3 easier. I'd love to see a team win it all never shooting a basketball

You won't get points for having someone on top of you, but you can still get automatic coopertition points by just climbing onto the ramp and dropping the side for your opponent. Carrying them is not necessary.

[Eric Kosek]

Originally Posted by Mr. Pockets

Correct


You won't get points for having someone on top of you,

Why would you not get points for having someone on top of you?
It says fully supported by the ramp, not solely supported by the ramp. If a robot is on top of another, then they are both supported fully by the ramp.

[sircedric4]

My fellow mentor and I were just kicking the 3 on a bridge idea around at the office, and with the new bumper rules you should be able to buy back 6 inches of play.

If we can convince everyone to only put the minimum bumper on their wide sides, then you can stagger your robots on the bridge such that the bumpers will nestle inside each other. If two robots nestle into the middle robot then that is 6 more inches of play, keeping you from falling off the bridge.

[Mr. Pockets]

Originally Posted by Eric Kosek

Why would you not get points for having someone on top of you?
It says fully supported by the ramp, not solely supported by the ramp. If a robot is on top of another, then they are both supported fully by the ramp.

See update here.
It says the robot must be completely supported by the bridge to be scored.

If you're saying that completely also allows you to ride another robot, I think you might just be overthinking this. I mean by that logic, being completely supported by the bridge would be impossible, because you're really just being supported by the carpet, the floor, the foundation, the earth, ad nauseum.

They might come out with a further confirmation either way, but for now I would avoid overthinking this too much.

[Eric Kosek]

Originally Posted by Mr. Pockets

See update here.

If you're saying that completely also allows you to ride another robot, I think you might just be overthinking this. I mean by that logic, being completely supported by the bridge would be impossible, because you're really just being supported by the carpet, the floor, the foundation, the earth, ad nauseum.

.

Think of it this way, if you have cargo in a truck while going over a bridge. What is holding supporting the cargo over the water? Sure its in the truck but the bridge is fully supporting the cargo above the water.

[Eric Kosek]

Definition of support: Bear all or part of the weight of; hold up.

If a robot is on top of the other, the bridge is still bearing all the weight of them both.

[Ross3098]

Originally Posted by lineskier

Personally I think a great strategy for a rookie team would be to design a very short light weight robot that others could drive on top of. During qualification rounds you could pick up a competitor and always get 2 coopertition points, and then in the elimination rounds it would make balancing 3 easier. I'd love to see a team win it all never shooting a basketball

2008 showed that it could obviously be done. 148 won the championship without ever picking up a trackball. They picked an easy strategy that many others overlooked and they did well in executing it.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Originally Posted by JB987

Or a robot could be built with a sturdy flat deck 11" high and side rails and position itself just an inch or so under edge of the bridge. Partner bot could drive up the other side of bridge which would lower onto low bot deck and partner could carefully drive onto deck of low bot (which could latch onto top bot, back up, lower bridge and drive up and position itself just past fulcrum). This assumes the top bot has a reasonably lower center of gravity itself and both are skilled drivers Lowbot contributes 10 each match in quals and 20 in elims...not bad for a team contribution. Not 987's cup of tea but could be option for others

57 actually came up with this idea when we were sketching out the plan of our robot and we had all this unused space in front of our shooter/conveyor tower. Since we seem incapable of passing up a crazy ramp scheme, we'll be investigating the feasibility of this scheme this weekend. From our point of view, there's little downside, since all it costs us is a little weight and cramming our electronics under that deck.

Now to ask the GDC if we could apply for a waiver on <G27> on ourselves, since balancing the coopertition bridge would be so much easier with an opponent robot on top of us.....