Canburglar Mechanisms

[Everett33]

Yesterday in the two Finals matches at the Livonia District there was a canburglar race between 503 and 548. Very fun to watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiOZN4G4OxI

[Wortmann]

Originally Posted by Everett33

Yesterday in the two Finals matches at the Livonia District there was a canburglar race between 503 and 548. Very fun to watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiOZN4G4OxI

Here is a closer look at our can battle in Livonia Finals Match 2:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXzk...ature=youtu.be

[AGPapa]

Originally Posted by Wortmann

Here is a closer look at our can battle in Livonia Finals Match 2:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXzk...ature=youtu.be

This an excellent view, you can see from here that 548 had grabbed the RC before 503 had even started to move.

How do both you and 503 actuate your canburglers? Does this difference in start time come mostly from the difference between the mechanisms, or does FMS initialization delay factor in?

[orangelight]

Originally Posted by AGPapa

This an excellent view, you can see from here that 548 had grabbed the RC before 503 had even started to move.

How do both you and 503 actuate your canburglers? Does this difference in start time come mostly from the difference between the mechanisms, or does FMS initialization delay factor in?

We run a PID loop when auto starts to lower the grabbers. I don't think FMS plays that much of a delay factor. The delay should be less than 10ms. Are canburglers can hit the can in <450ms. I assume it would have to do much more with the mechanisms.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by orangelight

We run a PID loop when auto starts to lower the grabbers. I don't think FMS plays that much of a delay factor. The delay should be less than 10ms. Are canburglers can hit the can in <45ms. I assume it would have to do much more with the mechanisms.

.045s? No way.

I went through frame by frame and it looks like .3s...seems a lot more realistic.

Congrats though. Your grabber looks like it's among the fastest that's been released.

[orangelight]

Originally Posted by Cory

.045s? No way.

I went through frame by frame and it looks like .3s...seems a lot more realistic.

Congrats though. Your grabber looks like it's among the fastest that's been released.

Sorry meant 450ms

[choprane]

Originally Posted by AGPapa

This an excellent view, you can see from here that 548 had grabbed the RC before 503 had even started to move.

How do both you and 503 actuate your canburglers? Does this difference in start time come mostly from the difference between the mechanisms, or does FMS initialization delay factor in?

Ours are two separate fourbar linkage sytems actuated by Banebot 775 motors attatched to Versa Planetary gearboxes using a 40:1 ratio. I'm sure Bryce can provide some insight on how 503 actuates their canburglars.

[TJP123]

Originally Posted by choprane

Ours are two separate fourbar linkage sytems actuated by Banebot 775 motors attatched to Versa Planetary gearboxes using a 40:1 ratio. I'm sure Bryce can provide some insight on how 503 actuates their canburglars.

The obvious answer: apparently, not fast enough.

That was fun to be a part of, though.

[Paul Boehringer]

Originally Posted by choprane

Ours are two separate fourbar linkage sytems actuated by Banebot 775 motors attatched to Versa Planetary gearboxes using a 40:1 ratio. I'm sure Bryce can provide some insight on how 503 actuates their canburglars.

Do those arms extend at all? Do you drive forward at all?

[cjl2625]

During elims, we had a dual can grabber. Two hooks actuated by pistons.
The consistency and speed need work, but we ended up with grabbing at least one can in each of our playoff matches.

[AndrewPospeshil]

One interesting thing to note is that at the Livonia district (where the 503/548 "Battle of the Baseline Bins" occurred) the first three picks were all bin stealers - 548, 27, 503. Granted Robotstangs were seeded 2nd and had been 1st for most of the previous day, but neither 27 or 503 were in the top 8 during alliance selections - 10th and 12th iirc. This goes to show how control of the center bins becomes much more important during high levels of play. Even in a district playoff, alliances can exceed the 3 standard cans and will need extras. Especially in finals where games are win/loss, controlling these center game pieces is crucial. I'm excited to see how the FRC meta progresses. Last year's was really fun to see how the game gradually evolved into passing the ball as fast as possible without using the actual floor, but this year's bin stealing meta will be just as exciting I predict. I think the FRC community is gonna go wild when tug-of-wars become really common.

[choprane]

Originally Posted by Paul Boehringer

Do those arms extend at all? Do you drive forward at all?

The arms do not extend at all, and are made of carbon fiber with custom water jet hooks clamped on the top. (I believe Alex hinted at this in the FIM Livonia thread). We use PID to get the arms to a position in which the hooks are just inside the hole of the RC. As soon as we are in position, we drive forward pulling the cans off the step and turn while retracting the arms back to their original upright position.

[Bryce Paputa]

Originally Posted by AGPapa

This an excellent view, you can see from here that 548 had grabbed the RC before 503 had even started to move.

How do both you and 503 actuate your canburglers? Does this difference in start time come mostly from the difference between the mechanisms, or does FMS initialization delay factor in?

We had four CIMs pulling ours down with a 28:1 reduction. We use Command Based Java and CAN Talons (anybody on Northville willing to comment on their control system?). We think that we are applying power down for 1 second as soon as the match starts, but clearly there is some delay. Match one was constant 80% power and match 2 was 100%. We're still trying to figure out if this is our code's fault, something to do with the field, or caused by a chain skipping teeth.

One of our mentors took some 60 fps video of it and claims that our travel time was 1 frame shorter once we started moving .

[orangelight]

Originally Posted by Bryce Paputa

We had four CIMs pulling ours down with a 28:1 reduction. We use Command Based Java and CAN Talons (anybody on Northville willing to comment on their control system?). We think that we are applying power down for 1 second as soon as the match starts, but clearly there is some delay. Match one was constant 80% power and match 2 was 100%. We're still trying to figure out if this is our code's fault, something to do with the field, or caused by a chain skipping teeth.

One of our mentors took some 60 fps video of it and claims that our travel time was 1 frame shorter once we started moving .

We use iterative based Java and run PID on CANTalons. In order to make ours faster we changed the P value

[viper196]

We have one as well. Haven't had any Can battles yet, but it should get interesting at the PNW DCMP.