2013 Robot Dimensions

[Scoyle]

With the new perimeter rules I was wondering what dimensions you used since they could be so flexible. Please also include your shape for a more informative answer. We went for the 28" x 28" square since we needed all the space we could get but did not have great machining access necessary for any shape other than a rectangle or a square.

[Boe]

we went with a 30 x 24 rectangular frame driving long and it worked fairly well

[yarden.saa]

27"X27" square

[craigboez]

27 x 27

[julianpowell]

30" x 25" rectangle, driven wide

[SoftwareBug2.0]

Originally Posted by Scoyle

We went for the 28" x 28" square...

How big is that with bumpers? It seems like you wouldn't fit through a standard door.

My team had a seven-sided V-like shape, whose dimensions I do not recall offhand; they are somewhat complex. It's on the left here: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/at...5&d=1363182897

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by SoftwareBug2.0

How big is that with bumpers? It seems like you wouldn't fit through a standard door.

My team had a seven-sided V-like shape, whose dimensions I do not recall offhand; they are somewhat complex. It's on the left here: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/at...5&d=1363182897

Almost every robot last year was 38x28 and they could fit through doors fine. 28x28 is exactly the same in that regard.

[Brandon Zalinsky]

21"x34" widebot

Please, FIRST, give us a 132" (38x28) perimeter again! We couldn't do half of what we wanted to do this year because of size restrictions.

[Siri]

27.75"x27.75" square (incidentally, also approximately a 27.75" cube, when collapsed). Pretty logical for us: maximized stable wheel base square for swerve. Other than ensuring it fit on the pyramid corner between levels (for the way we climb), there wasn't any more strategic incentive on the size/shape. We try to churn our chassis design out within days, so peculiar shapes are an investment we didn't have the need for this year. Never had a problem with doors.

Good question. I liked the rule's setup this year. Even the small number was very appropriately challenging from a design perspective.

[Jon Stratis]

27x28... We wanted to leave a spare inch to make sure we wouldn't be over size. There were plenty of robots this year that were slightly over size, when they tried to build right to the limit. However, with a little filing on the corners, it was a lot easier to fix this year than in previous years!

[Pault]

32x23.75 rectangle, driven wide. We did this primarily to get more width out of our floor pickup.

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by Flak-Bait

Please, FIRST, give us a 132" (38x28) perimeter again! We couldn't do half of what we wanted to do this year because of size restrictions.

I would say this is actually a good thing. Forcing teams to choose which parts of the challenge they'll address leads to more diverse robots and a more interesting game on the field. Looking back over the past few years, having so many robots available that could do everything really did make match ups a little less interesting than this year.

[Boe]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

I would say this is actually a good thing. Forcing teams to choose which parts of the challenge they'll address leads to more diverse robots and a more interesting game on the field. Looking back over the past few years, having so many robots available that could do everything really did make match ups a little less interesting than this year.

I agree it led to a really diverse field of robot types that hasn't been seen recently, which was nice and really made this game one of the best from a strategists point of view. It would have been cool though to see some of the robots people could have made with the old size. Also perimeter should be the new measurement it lead to a lot of different looking robots, and also seemed to be a lot easier for inspectors to check.

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by Boe

I agree it led to a really diverse field of robot types that hasn't been seen recently, which was nice and really made this game one of the best from a strategists point of view. It would have been cool though to see some of the robots people could have made with the old size. Also perimeter should be the new measurement it lead to a lot of different looking robots, and also seemed to be a lot easier for inspectors to check.

Actually, it was harder for inspectors to check, but easier for teams to pass! with the sizing box in previous years, inspectors had it easy - they got to stand back while teams tried to shove their robot into the box. This year, inspectors had to pull out the tape measure and work their way around the entire robot, making sure the tape wasn't going over a "minor protrusion" and was pulled tight. Much more work for the inspector

[DELurker]

27" x 27" with a 1" last-minute add-on to bring the shooter deck back inside the frame perimeter when open at the start of a match...