Designing a climbing mechanism for 2013... a humbling experience

[connor.worley]

Originally Posted by Cory

I will bet money there are no more than 30 teams in all of FIRST that do it in an official match.

And far less will do it in a reasonable amount of time.

[Donut]

Originally Posted by Madison

I wonder how many of the 'simple' ideas people profess to have were things we considered and dismissed as being too unreliable, too unpredictable or not simple at all.

I think 'simple' is a relative term. We have an idea that is 'simple' in the sense that it only requires 1 or 2 moving parts to accomplish. I certainly don't think it will be simple to build to work reliably, especially for a team that has a poor track record with past arms. If we go for it I think we will be foregoing shooting and ground pick up to have any chance of success.

A consistent 30+ points sounds very appealing even if that's all we'll do. This is my 10th year in FIRST and I've only been involved with a robot that can score 30+ a match twice. That kind of score makes you an alliance captain at most regionals.

[Djur]

Originally Posted by Cory

Anyone who thinks a 30 point hang is simple has no idea what they're talking about, IMO.

There are so many dependencies that affect every aspect of your robot. This is the hardest task we've ever been asked to do and I will bet money there are no more than 30 teams in all of FIRST that do it in an official match.

Challenge accepted.

[Nemo]

Our team is trying to figure out how to climb the corners, but it definitely does not seem simple. I agree that it is humbling.

We're looking at ways of sitting on the corner joints (the only decent place to sit in a transition between levels) and pulling up on the next corner joint. We have ideas (none simple), and at the stage we're at, I am looking at it more as a system where there are several little climbing subsystems that have to be designed and tweaked properly for the overall scheme to work. I see us slogging through all of the details and prototyping and testing and iterating as opposed to having a flash of insight that makes it twice as easy as we thought it would be.

Our first regional is Kansas City. If we don't do a level 3 climber, I think we'll show up and see that 1625/1730/1986/etc have brought their L3 climbers that also shoot frisbees. If they do, good luck winning with a 10 point hanger. Hard or not, we really want to climb to the top. If we are forced to fall back on a 10 point climber, it won't be for lack of trying.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by Nemo

Our first regional is Kansas City. If we don't do a level 3 climber, I think we'll show up and see that 1625/1730/1986/etc have brought their L3 climbers that also shoot frisbees. If they do, good luck winning with a 10 point hanger.

Excuse a bit of a tangent, but I just wanted to address this line of thought. This isn't meant to be an attack on you so much as it is a counter to a really pervasive idea in FIRST Robotics.

This is really the wrong way to think about this problem. It is oh-so-tempting to get into the "If they do it, we need to as well, or we are automatically worse than them" mentality. I only know this because my teams / I have done it time and time again before.

First - you are never playing a 1v1 match. Yes, it's great if you can go frisbee for frisbee with the big guns, but as long as you have alliance partners you will be able to rely on those partners to achieve the tasks which you can't do.

Second - if you throw 5 weeks into a 30 point hanger because "team X will do a 30 point hang AND shoot frisbees", and you don't use it, that's hundreds of man-hours you could have put into your shooter, your intake, or into drive practice in order to get your scoring rate up at or above their level! The jack of all trades really is the master of none for this game more than many others. And if 1625 matches you frisbee for frisbee and can 30 point hang: assemble a better alliance and the match is still in question. Three specialized robots will often beat one multi-function robot and two supporters.

As anyone who has spent way too much time on the thirty point hang will tell you, getting a solid design that gets you up the tower is a massive undertaking. Every other feature of your robot will be potentially compromised to make this happen.

I honestly think the above debate this year is mostly academic - fears of your local elite team being able to "do everything well" this year are going to be unfounded. The best frisbee shooters (in terms of scoring rate across the entire match) will not be teams that have reliable, working fast 30 point hangers. I predict there will be less than a dozen teams that can 30 point hang efficiently while being even 90% as effective as the top-tier frisbee scorers.

[pfreivald]

Most important things in life are simple. Few of them are easy!

[rinim324]

Can i get an expert opinion on a design that uses a three stage arm which extends via a pulley system but retracts using a winch powered by a toughbox? The Stages are 27in long with 8in of overlap.

[MrForbes]

Originally Posted by rinim324

Can i get an expert opinion on a design that uses a three stage arm which extends via a pulley system but retracts using a winch powered by a toughbox? The Stages are 27in long with 8in of overlap.

Do you want an opinion on the legality of it? or whether or not such a mechanism could work?

Either way, we'd need a lot more information about the design.

[SciBorg Dave]

Originally Posted by Nemo

Our team is trying to figure out how to climb the corners, but it definitely does not seem simple. I agree that it is humbling.

We're looking at ways of sitting on the corner joints (the only decent place to sit in a transition between levels) and pulling up on the next corner joint. We have ideas (none simple), and at the stage we're at, I am looking at it more as a system where there are several little climbing subsystems that have to be designed and tweaked properly for the overall scheme to work. I see us slogging through all of the details and prototyping and testing and iterating as opposed to having a flash of insight that makes it twice as easy as we thought it would be.

Our first regional is Kansas City. If we don't do a level 3 climber, I think we'll show up and see that 1625/1730/1986/etc have brought their L3 climbers that also shoot frisbees. If they do, good luck winning with a 10 point hanger. Hard or not, we really want to climb to the top. If we are forced to fall back on a 10 point climber, it won't be for lack of trying.

One thing to remember that 3 robots at the 30 point level (90) will not be done but 1 or 2 times in the 6 weeks of competing. I think the a 10, 20, 30 point combo will be seen more often, I think we will see a lot of 10, 10, 20 so even if you are a 10 point hanger there is a place for you. Remember if you fall 3 to 5 feet trying a 30 point hang your weekend will be over.

[Darth Drew]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

It is oh-so-tempting to get into the "If they do it, we need to as well, or we are automatically worse than them" mentality.

I really think Chris hit the nail on the head, as a team that is low on team members and fancy things like water jet cutters, the goal IMO is NOT to be the highest scoring team around, but instead to be the most appealling one to the high-scorers. So instead of trying to do something because the best teams will do it, find something that will make your robot valuable to someone who can climb to level 3 consistently and score a lot of frisbees, and then do that well and spend the rest of your time getting your drivers practice so they can drive the robot well and make it even more appealling.

[Kevin Sevcik]

So just to keep everyone in the thread updated, Team Update 1-15-2012 has suddenly made climbing a rather lot easier. The 54" cylinder is now robot relative while you're touching the pyramid. Which obviously makes many mechanisms and methods a lot more viable.

My condolences to those of you who have already locked in a more restricted, less robust design based on yesterday's rules.b

[s_forbes]

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

My condolences to those of you who have already locked in a more restricted, less robust design based on yesterday's rules.b

I don't like how the new rules only make certain approaches less restricted. The new size limits are actually more restricting for certain approaches, to the point that some designs are now illegal (like ours for example...)

We can compromise to make it work, but it won't be nearly as pretty to watch.

[Drivencrazy]

Originally Posted by s_forbes

We can compromise to make it work, but it won't be nearly as pretty to watch.

But perhaps more simple and robust? The new ruling seems to allow for less robot articulation than before. (Just wish they would have changed it sooner)

[Kevin Sevcik]

Originally Posted by Drivencrazy

But perhaps more simple and robust? The new ruling seems to allow for less robot articulation than before. (Just wish they would have changed it sooner)

Nah. I saw the climbing storyboard 842 posted. It was a pretty nice solution to the problem and only needed an arm that was pivoted at the base and presumably a linear lift on either side of that arm. The rest was shifting CGs to position the hooks on the arm. I have a feeling that arm was also 842's pickup and shooter, so I have to say I was looking forward to seeing a team doing pretty much everything on the field with one highly integrated subsystem. I hope they can still work things out.

[s_forbes]

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

Nah. I saw the climbing storyboard 842 posted. It was a pretty nice solution to the problem and only needed an arm that was pivoted at the base and presumably a linear lift on either side of that arm. The rest was shifting CGs to position the hooks on the arm. I have a feeling that arm was also 842's pickup and shooter, so I have to say I was looking forward to seeing a team doing pretty much everything on the field with one highly integrated subsystem. I hope they can still work things out.

Yep, pretty much nailed it. After an emergency redesign session, it looks like we'll still fit with some modifications. Catastrophe averted.