Advantages to a long bot?

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by F22Rapture

Traction is probably the wrong word, but it's easier to deflect the force of a longbot than it is a widebot.

Why?

Originally Posted by F22Rapture

most longbots have drop-centers so depending on the wheel types (some teams like to put omni's in the front) and whether or not it's 6wd or only has the back 2 sets powered, a longbot on a drop-center pressed up against another robot may or may not have the same footing that a widebot which usually wouldn't have the drop-center would have.

If there are omni-wheels, then yes traction will be effected.

Drop center longbots wont be effected if they are hit from the front or back, but yes they could "spin out" if it from the side, due to the shorter wheelbase.

What does

may or may note have the same footing

mean?

[MichaelBick]

This was mentioned earlier but not explicitly stated. long bots will turn faster than a wide bot.

[IndySam]

Originally Posted by MICHAELABICK

This was mentioned earlier but not explicitly stated. long bots will turn faster than a wide bot.

Really, you sure about that?

One of the things that makes a wide bot hard to drive is the fact that it turns so quickly.

[Peyton Yeung]

Originally Posted by IndySam

Really, you sure about that?

One of the things that makes a wide bot hard to drive is the fact that it turns so quickly.

Quoted for truth

[dellagd]

a) Is "Turns too fast" really a legitimate reason not to do a wide bot? That is so easily fixed in code. Even if you dont want to loose any control throw, throw some exponential rates in there for some fun.

b) For this year, we found long bot beneficial as it was basically impossible for us to tip backwards when going over the bump even though we didnt have a low center of gravity. Wide would have been a different story.

[MichaelBick]

Originally Posted by IndySam

Really, you sure about that?

One of the things that makes a wide bot hard to drive is the fact that it turns so quickly.

If you think about it, for robots with the same effective wheelbase, the robot with the wider track width will turn slower. This is because the wheels are further out so they have to travel a farther distance to achieve the same amount of rotation. Sorry I should have clarified that.

[IndySam]

Originally Posted by MICHAELABICK

If you think about it, for robots with the same effective wheelbase, the robot with the wider track width will turn slower. This is because the wheels are further out so they have to travel a farther distance to achieve the same amount of rotation. Sorry I should have clarified that.

Correct, long bots have shorter effective wheelbases so they will generally turn quicker.

This has always made me wonder if an 8 wheel drive long robot could give you the stability of long with the shorter quicker turning of a wide bot?

[apalrd]

Originally Posted by MICHAELABICK

If you think about it, for robots with the same effective wheelbase, the robot with the wider track width will turn slower. This is because the wheels are further out so they have to travel a farther distance to achieve the same amount of rotation. Sorry I should have clarified that.

4wd wide robots generally have an aspect ratio (ratio between side/side wheel spacing and front/back wheel spacing) that is the same as a 6wd drop center, leading to less turning scrub. A 6wd drop center long robot will have substantially less turning scrub because the aspect ratio will be half of a normal 6wd drop center.

Thinking about turning scrub is important if you want to turn. It also has a huge effect on how squirrely a robot is.

[LeelandS]

Robot orientation is generally a game decision. It usually comes down to, is being wide worth the cost of stability. In 2012, with the triple balance being such an important game piece, many teams went with a wide orientation robot to allow the triple balance to be more possible.

In most other games, there is no significant advantage to a wide robot. In fact, in most games, it could be an issue. Several games in recent years (I'm thinking 07, 08, 10 and 11) saw many long robots because the stability was an advantage; it allowed for some robot designs that required forward/backward stability. For example, in 07/11, many robots had elevators. When the elevators went up, it changed the robots center of gravity to up and to a side. On a wide robot, this is dangerous, as the robot will be more easily tilted to one side and subsequently tipped. Likewise, a robot with an arm would be in even more danger. The CoG would be elevated, and set outside the robot's perimeter, which could very easily tip the wide robot over.

In a game like 2008, a similar concept is applied. The two major game designs (a ball elevator and a catapult of some kind) would have been difficult on a wide base. Like in 2007, an elevator makes the CoG elevate and go to a side, especially when those big trackballs are elevated to 6'6" above the ground. On a catapult device, the force of the ball launching could generate a great deal of force to one side of the robot, which could tip up or tip over a wide orientation drive base.

In 2010, the bumps dividing the field were significantly larger than this year's; one foot tall, if I remember correctly. I saw some wide robots do it well (Team 86 doesn't count...), but without a doubt, robots without forward/backward stability were much more prone to tipping.

Most often, there is no need for a wide robot. In 2006, 2009 and 2012, robots with a wide drive system could have some kind intake on the wide side to aid in game piece acquisition. However, in most other years, the decrease in stability is a hindrance. Which is why most years, you see the number of long robots far outnumbers the wide.