Climbing Mechanism Ideas

[NGL321]

My team is thinking about two options at this point.

A. A tall robot that will position a v shaved divot around the corner and haul itself up via belt or arms and ratcheting over the knuckles (Keeping the base horizontal to the floor)

or

B. A short robot that would drive up the corner, forcing itself up on a rail, and pulling itself up along the bottom of the robot using neumatic pistons, also using the ratcheting system.

[vhcook]

Originally Posted by SM987

Just prop yourself up on an air cylinder "foot" on top of a frisbee, throw a batman hook to rung 2 (making sure to somehow touch rung 1 in the process) and hang for a quick 20, or climb for a slower 30.

Strategies using discs to aid or inhibit climbing are out per G16.

[Nuttyman54]

Originally Posted by SM987

Just prop yourself up on an air cylinder "foot" on top of a frisbee, throw a batman hook to rung 2 (making sure to somehow touch rung 1 in the process) and hang for a quick 20, or climb for a slower 30.

G16: TEAMS and/or ROBOTS may not employ strategies that use DISCS to either aid or inhibit a ROBOT CLIMB.

Violation: TECHNICAL FOUL. If the DISC(S) inhibits an opponent’s CLIMB attempt, the opponent ROBOT’S ALLIANCE is awarded points for a successful Level 3 CLIMB.

Sorry, no dice! (nice idea though)

[SM987]

Ah was playing off the tarp idea. A retractable "parachute" seems more attractive now.

[TJ Cawley]

i'm an alumni of Team 1108, Panther Robotics and we have our 2nd robot which was apart of the 2004 FIRST Frenzy game. our climbing mechanism is a winch made from the CIM equivalent motor paired with a Dualt drill transmission. this combination was indestructible durring competition and had no problems lifting a 140 lb robot (battery weight included)

[gabrielau23]

Originally Posted by nuggetsyl

Teams had a hard time feeding balls to great shooters last year so I feel safe in saying this is not going to happen.

lolol. The only consistent "feeding" I saw was during autonomous when a team programmed their bot to regurgitate all their balls into an excellent shooter. Other than that....lol. This requires WAY too much coordination for two teams who haven't even met before.

[Randomness]

Originally Posted by pfreivald

That seems to be in direct conflict with the rules.

So I wouldn't be surprised to see my interpretation disallowed on Q and A, but I do think that it works as the rules stand.

Here it goes:
"Points are awarded for the highest Level achieved for every ALLIANCE ROBOT that CLIMBS its PYRAMID. The Level to which a ROBOT has CLIMBED is determined by the lowest point of the ROBOT (in relation to the FIELD). CLIMB point values and Levels are defined in Figure 3-4.

A ROBOT has CLIMBED its PYRAMID if it contacts the PYRAMID in sequential order (Level 0, 1, 2, 3) during ascent and no more than two (2) Levels simultaneously.

If a CLIMB is considered unacceptable (e.g. a ROBOT has touched non-adjacent Levels or more than two (2) Levels at a time), a Referee will indicate a rejected CLIMB by turning the offending ROBOT’S PLAYER STATION LED strings yellow. The ROBOT will be ineligible for CLIMB points unless and until it begins a new CLIMB from the floor, Level 0."

So a robot that is boosted past 60'' is at the highest Level, and the rules say that a robot gets credit for the highest Level (the top) for a successful CLIMB (passing the following criteria). The question is whether or not it has CLIMBED legally. Did the robot contact the pyramid in sequential order? Well, probably - it certainly wasn't out of order, as all it touched was level 0, and the rules never specifically state that robots much contact each level that they want credit for. And the robot clearly hasn't contacted more than two levels simultaneously.

If you look at the (e.g ...) section in the third paragraph, then a boosted robot has succeeded even more easily - it definitely didn't touch non-adjacent levels or more than two at a time. That said, other scenarios that pass the (e.g. ...) part fail the first part.

Bottom line: would I be surprised if Q and A said that I was wrong? Not really. But it does make sense to make it slightly easier for teams to help others, as there are additional coordination/strategy problems with assisting others.

[pmangels17]

It seems that many people want to climb the corner. However, it is going to be near impossible to keep from spinning. There would need to be an incredibly complex system to prevent spinning without breaking the device

[Cal578]

Originally Posted by pmangels17

It seems that many people want to climb the corner. However, it is going to be near impossible to keep from spinning. There would need to be an incredibly complex system to prevent spinning without breaking the device

A robot climbing the corner, particularly from the outside, could use the floor and/or rungs to avoid spinning. It's not easy, but I wouldn't characterize it as "near impossible" or "incredibly complex". Our team is working on a few concepts along these lines, but nothing solid yet.

[JamesCH95]

Originally Posted by MetalJacket

That's one of the most complicated elements of this climb. It cannot be accomplished using a method that is intuitive to how a human would complete the task (aside from jumping up the levels but I don't think most people will feel comfortable with a 100-something lb robot jumping around 5'-8' in the air).

I think this is a bad assumption. Humans employ several different ways of climbing depending on the person, their build, and any athletic training they might have.

Originally Posted by pmangels17

It seems that many people want to climb the corner. However, it is going to be near impossible to keep from spinning. There would need to be an incredibly complex system to prevent spinning without breaking the device

I think that this is a bad assumption also.

[Alex.q]

It seems like a lot of ideas require claws or grippers which do not rotate on the pipe. Would a pipe wrench mechanism work in this situation? It would allow you to pivot your robot up in one direction without rotating back due to your center of gravity. I don't know if it would properly grip the pyramid or if it would damage the pipes, but perhaps someone could test this. (I say someone and not me because I am just an alum and my team doesn't want to climb past lvl 1).

[mikegrundvig]

Originally Posted by pmangels17

It seems that many people want to climb the corner. However, it is going to be near impossible to keep from spinning. There would need to be an incredibly complex system to prevent spinning without breaking the device

There are very clever design ideas that can climb the corner and provide for stability without requiring a gorilla grip on the pipe or rungs.

-Mike

[Brian Selle]

Originally Posted by gabrielau23

lolol. The only consistent "feeding" I saw was during autonomous when a team programmed their bot to regurgitate all their balls into an excellent shooter. Other than that....lol. This requires WAY too much coordination for two teams who haven't even met before.

The thing that's different this year is that many teams will have hoppers to accept Frisbees from the loading station. If you can make your robot look like a feeder slot chances are you will be able to find a mate.

[RSaunders]

Originally Posted by Alex.q

It seems like a lot of ideas require claws or grippers which do not rotate on the pipe. Would a pipe wrench mechanism work in this situation? It would allow you to pivot your robot up in one direction without rotating back due to your center of gravity. I don't know if it would properly grip the pyramid or if it would damage the pipes, but perhaps someone could test this.

After working on assembling a practice tower, I don't thing that a non-slip grip on a pipe is a good idea. The pipes we used weren't powder coated, and pipe wrenches visibly damaged them with less than 50 pounds of force. To grip the pipe without damaging the finish seems very difficult. I guess it's a function of how many square inches of contact patch you have, but the sub-inch contact patch of a pipe wrench isn't enough.

We've been looking at leverage against the tower support posts below the horizontal pipes, they are in the same zone. A pretty compact "claw" can make solid three-point contact with a single Level of the pyramid and support 150 pounds with compression contact only.

[Siri]

Originally Posted by RSaunders

After working on assembling a practice tower, I don't thing that a non-slip grip on a pipe is a good idea. The pipes we used weren't powder coated, and pipe wrenches visibly damaged them with less than 50 pounds of force. To grip the pipe without damaging the finish seems very difficult. I guess it's a function of how many square inches of contact patch you have, but the sub-inch contact patch of a pipe wrench isn't enough.

Thank you for the insight! Do you think the corner pipes could still hold up to something like this (notwithstanding the horizontal rung 'bumps'), or is there still a serious risk of field damage?