Robots and Small Balls

[archiver]

Posted by Tom at 2/12/2001 5:33 PM EST


Student on team #25, Raider Robotix, from North Brunswick Township High School and Bristol Myers-Squib.



After looking at most of the robots this year I noticed that there are no robots that concentrate on just small balls. Is anybody concentrating on just that part of the game?

[archiver]

Posted by Patrick Dingle at 2/12/2001 6:15 PM EST


Coach on team #639, Red B^2, from Ithaca High School and Cornell University.


In Reply to: Robots and Small Balls
Posted by Tom on 2/12/2001 5:33 PM EST:



We were planning on having the ability to pick up small balls for about 4 weeks.... But we dropped the idea in favor of a more reliable large-ball system. We simply saw no advantage to picking up small balls -- ending the match early is better than picking up the small balls.

: After looking at most of the robots this year I noticed that there are no robots that concentrate on just small balls. Is anybody concentrating on just that part of the game?

[archiver]

Posted by Chris Orimoto at 2/12/2001 6:51 PM EST


Student on team #368, Kika Mana, from McKinley High School and Nasa Ames/Hawaiian Electric/Weinberg Foundation.


In Reply to: Robots and Small Balls
Posted by Tom on 2/12/2001 5:33 PM EST:



I'll have to agree with Patrick on this one and say
that the small balls on the opposite side of the field
just don't seem worth the time to raise up 7' into the
air.

However, the balls in the alliance station are a
different story altogether. I think that the "near"
goal will be filled by the alliance station in nearly
every match.

Of course, I may be wrong and there may be a
strategical advantage to being able to score small
balls (like being chosen as part of an elimination-
match alliance). Of course (in the words of the great
Dr. Joe) time will tell... ;-)

Just my personal thoughts...

Chr

[archiver]

Posted by colleen - T190 at 2/13/2001 1:02 AM EST


Engineer on team #190, Gompei, from Massachusetts Academy of Math and Science and WPI.


In Reply to: Re: Robots and Small Balls
Posted by Chris Orimoto on 2/12/2001 6:51 PM EST:



Balls can fit through the side too.. don't forget...

No, lifting 7ft high isn't efficient really (for smalls).. but other methods may just be...

So we shall see...

[archiver]

Posted by Matt Leese at 2/12/2001 7:00 PM EST


Other on team #73, Tigerbolt, from Edison Technical HS and Alstom & Fiber Technologies & RIT.


In Reply to: Robots and Small Balls
Posted by Tom on 2/12/2001 5:33 PM EST:



Ok, well, as I pointed out before, we're doing the small ball thing. We figured there are four robots on the field and they all need something to do. So we figured that an alliance that can handle small balls (hopefully including us) will be more successful than one that can't. Maybe we'll be right, maybe we'll be wrong. Time will tell.

Matt

[archiver]

Posted by Dodd Stacy at 2/13/2001 12:04 AM EST


Engineer on team #95, Lebanon Robotics Team, from Lebanon High School and CRREL/CREARE.


In Reply to: Robots and Small Balls
Posted by Tom on 2/12/2001 5:33 PM EST:



: After looking at most of the robots this year I noticed that there are no robots that concentrate on just small balls. Is anybody concentrating on just that part of the game?

I'll bet that some teams will specialize in this. The powerhouse alliances will have the first bot over the bridge fill the far goal with black balls, while the last bot carries over the near goal after it's filled by the human players.

It's a time sharing thing. With 4x for double goal balancing on the bridge and maybe 2x (or more, if everyone is really good) for the clock, those far black balls are worth 80 - 100 points. It's all a question of efficient parallel tasking while the clock ticks.

Dodd

[archiver]

Posted by Ken Leung at 2/13/2001 5:49 AM EST


Student on team #192, Gunn Robotics Team, from Henry M. Gunn Senior High School.


In Reply to: Re: Robots and Small Balls
Posted by Dodd Stacy on 2/13/2001 12:04 AM EST:



It just logically makes sense that a team is going to head for the other goal right at the beginning of the match. It's a sound strategy because 1) you get to score 10 pts in the end zone easily, 2) you can help push the far goal toward the bridge for balancing both goal, 3) it saves lots of time from trying across the field later in the game.

So, any teams that pick this strategy can easily incorporate a small ball collector device that can load up the far goal easily. The fast that they don't have to cross the barrier makes it much easier to raise small balls 7" high in the air.

And as I said before (look at the post below), small balls are probably going to matter in the finals. It doesn't have to worth 80-100 pts... it just have to be one point more than the other alliances to win the competition.

As for the near goal, it just make sense that human players will be filling it up with black balls. Maybe in a match, a robot can push the far goal toward the human players to load it up fully, but I am not sure how fast that can be accomplished.

Plus, just the look of two fully loaded goals balanced on the bridge is going to be amazing.