2 Shooters???

[Jon Jack]

Team 1538 is in an interesting situation... We have TWO shooters! Both fire the same distance, both have the same consistency, both are accurate. Here are some videos of both of our shooters:

This is shooter #1:
http://robotics.hightechhigh.org/dai...6/DSCN1533.MOV

This is shooter #2:
http://robotics.hightechhigh.org/dai...6/DSCN1603.MOV


-Both shoot about 10' high and 25 feet

[Conor Ryan]

Wow, both look really nice. The first one is possibly the most innovative one posted this year (45's teaser, though probably not a shooter, was slightly more innovative) As with most shooters, I have a few question

• Any idea on the exit speeds of your shots?
• The first video had a wheel powered by a drill, what's the power source in number 2?
  • If the motor is kit legal, then what kind of reduction and wheel size do you have?
• Which one are you guys leaning towards using?

Great work 1538

[Ian Curtis]

I'm likin' the first one. I want one of those to go along with 179's ball collection device.

[Jon Jack]

Originally Posted by Conor Ryan

Wow, both look really nice. The first one is possibly the most innovative one posted this year (45's teaser, though probably not a shooter, was slightly more innovative) As with most shooters, I have a few question

• Any idea on the exit speeds of your shots?
• The first video had a wheel powered by a drill, what's the power source in number 2?
  • If the motor is kit legal, then what kind of reduction and wheel size do you have?
• Which one are you guys leaning towards using?

Great work 1538

We do not have exact exit speeds on any of our shooters. We should have those in a couple days.

Both videos you watched were taken last night. This morning we hooked up a mini-bike motor, running it at 75% of the max. output, to shooter #1 and it fired the ball 12' high at a distance of 30'. Shooter #2 is power by 2 mini-bike motors, running at about 50% each. So yes, both shooters are legal. At least when it comes to motors. Muzzle velocity might be a bit high, but that can be changed.

We are leaning toward shooter #1 because we can load the balls low and shoot high. Right now we are revising shooter #1 and working on a hopper and collection system for our robot. More pictures soon...

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by jjack

Team 1538 is in an interesting situation... We have TWO shooters! Both fire the same distance, both have the same consistency, both are accurate. Here are some videos of both of our shooters

Nice work! We prototyped both of those (and two more). We eventually chose #3.

[ctshirk7]

i like them both the first one seems like it might be harder to aim but they are effective. compare weights and size... you might want the weight somewhere else later on...

[Jon Jack]

Originally Posted by ctshirk7

i like them both the first one seems like it might be harder to aim but they are effective. compare weights and size... you might want the weight somewhere else later on...

What you see in the video is a prototype. We're discussing what to do for the final version that will be on the robot. Looking at it up close there is a lot we can cut off. The final version should look pretty cool.

[Chriszuma]

I think option 2 would probably be better, at least in terms of space efficiency. If you have a huge nautilus shell on your robot, you have less space to store balls.

[Jery]

Originally Posted by Chriszuma

I think option 2 would probably be better, at least in terms of space efficiency. If you have a huge nautilus shell on your robot, you have less space to store balls.

Absolutely true Chriszuma. We are looking into the different ways of picking up and storing balls. We are going to the max footprint atm. But so far the spiral design looks really cool when we started thinking about all the plexy we get to use. Im really excited, and I know the first design will be taking up a lot of space, not like last year where we were taking things off our bot because of weight issues, this year its size issues.

its not that huge chriszuma, its only about 24x40x9 heheh but thanks.

- JERY!!!!

[Jon Jack]

Also with some of the modifications we're making it will be shorter and weight less.

[Greg Marra]

Clearly, the best option would be to use both shooters on the robot at the same time!

Think about it, not only would you be able to score balls twice as quickly, defending robots would have to double team you in order to stop all of your ball-scoring potential! And if you get pinned, just use whichever launcher happens to be facing the goal!

It's foolproof!

[Jon Jack]

Originally Posted by Greg Marra

Clearly, the best option would be to use both shooters on the robot at the same time!

Think about it, not only would you be able to score balls twice as quickly, defending robots would have to double team you in order to stop all of your ball-scoring potential! And if you get pinned, just use whichever launcher happens to be facing the goal!

It's foolproof!

Well... This thoguht has passed through our heads, briefly. There are a couple problems with using both at the same time:

1) Power consumption, in order to power both we'd have to use both mini-bike motors running at or near 100% max. output.

2) Shooter #2 tears the cover off of balls. When we were feeding balls through it you could see the foam flying off the balls as they left.

3) The way we are collecting an storing balls would make using both shooters very difficult.

We will have some pictures of our collection and storing system with in the next couple days as well as our 2 speed transmission.

[Rick TYler]

The good thing about the ramp launcher is that you can easily concentrate the motor and wheel down low and launch up high. Those are the two main reasons we seriously considered the design. We think our compromise achieves most of those two goals with a more-compact design. Again, nice work.

[Eric Scheuing]

The first shooter seems to be the better design, although number 2 seems more consistent.

[Jon Jack]

Originally Posted by Eric Scheuing

The first shooter seems to be the better design, although number 2 seems more consistent.

Actually they have about the same consistency. The nice part about shooter #1 is that you don't need to tilt too far back to shoot high. Plus it draws about the same amount of power that shooter #2 draws. The one disadvantage of shooter #1 is that it is kind of heavy, but with a redesign, could be lighter.