Go to Post every year, Dean's speeches get better. in the process, he's also teaching people to be patient. - Winged Wonder [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Technical > Technical Discussion
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Closed Thread
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 4 votes, 4.25 average. Display Modes
  #16   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-08-2011, 11:00 PM
Chris is me's Avatar
Chris is me Chris is me is offline
no bag, vex only, final destination
AKA: Pinecone
FRC #0228 (GUS Robotics); FRC #2170 (Titanium Tomahawks)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Glastonbury, CT
Posts: 7,589
Chris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Chris is me
Re: Minibot Standardization (FRC 2011: Logomotion)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bjenks548 View Post
There was a similar idea to this last year to have a standard position for a suspension bar. As it was a great idea, it never worked because teams all went on their own plan.
Not at all. Why would teams design for a suspension bar when they could design for the very standard, has to be there hanging bar instead? Making a different "suspension bar" size was stupid.
__________________
Mentor / Drive Coach: 228 (2016-?)
...2016 Waterbury SFs (with 3314, 3719), RIDE #2 Seed / Winners (with 1058, 6153), Carver QFs (with 503, 359, 4607)
Mentor / Consultant Person: 2170 (2017-?)
---
College Mentor: 2791 (2010-2015)
...2015 TVR Motorola Quality, FLR GM Industrial Design
...2014 FLR Motorola Quality / SFs (with 341, 4930)
...2013 BAE Motorola Quality, WPI Regional #1 Seed / Delphi Excellence in Engineering / Finalists (with 20, 3182)
...2012 BAE Imagery / Finalists (with 1519, 885), CT Xerox Creativity / SFs (with 2168, 118)
Student: 1714 (2009) - 2009 Minnesota 10,000 Lakes Regional Winners (with 2826, 2470)
2791 Build Season Photo Gallery - Look here for mechanism photos My Robotics Blog (Updated April 11 2014)
  #17   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-08-2011, 11:43 PM
ChristopherBuck's Avatar
ChristopherBuck ChristopherBuck is offline
Registered User
FRC #0612
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 38
ChristopherBuck is a jewel in the roughChristopherBuck is a jewel in the roughChristopherBuck is a jewel in the rough
Re: Minibot Standardization (FRC 2011: Logomotion)

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH View Post
I was thinking (dangerous I know) that it would be possible for the minibots to either have a tower contact button or a "you're on your own" dead-man switch, and just be running a program all match that said, wait until X switch toggles to the other position. Minimal programming needed. Or have the NXT in a standard-ish area so a servo mounted on a "flexible" arm could hit the run button easily.
I like the idea of the dead man switch. What about if the dead man switch kept a power switch open on the minibot, and when the dead man switch falls out, the circuit is closed, and the minibot powers on?

Quote:
Originally Posted by luc.bettaieb View Post
Yeah, I'd say as much as possible teams should strive to make their robots be able to launch any kind of minibot that can fit in the 12x12x12 inch dimensions.
I agree. And at the same time, teams should construct their minibots such that they dont have any oddities that may hinder deployment by some systems such as curved faces; they may not work with certain implementations of a push deployment


I believe that minibots should be designed such that they are deployment-mechanism-agnostic, be it by pushing, swinging, or something else, because teams will end up having to make different deployment mechanisms based on how the rest of their robot is designed

Last edited by ChristopherBuck : 01-08-2011 at 11:46 PM.
  #18   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2011, 12:14 AM
Grim Tuesday's Avatar
Grim Tuesday Grim Tuesday is offline
Registered User
AKA: Simon Bohn
FRC #0639 (Code Red)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: Baltimore MD (JHU)
Posts: 1,597
Grim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Minibot Standardization (FRC 2011: Logomotion)

I propose the name of: MIND: MINibot Deployment


It is a ramp that is essentially drawbridge, that deploys at 30 inches (at the line) and emulates deploying at base level. Other than that, there must be 12*12*12 space inside the robot to store minibots.

Last edited by Grim Tuesday : 01-09-2011 at 12:24 AM.
  #19   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2011, 01:53 AM
EricH's Avatar
EricH EricH is offline
New year, new team
FRC #1197 (Torbots)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 19,703
EricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Minibot Standardization (FRC 2011: Logomotion)

I think there are 2 things to be standardized.
1) Minibot activation.
2) Minibot-pole transition device.

#2 is the simplest. The drawbridge or a platform device is simple: move ramp/robot to either the base or the pole and let it do its thing. Telling it when to go could be as simple as a bar across the end that when released turns the minibot on or lets it go.

#1 is harder. NXT device, pure mechanical, non-NXT... Ideally, the start trigger is contained on the minibot and is "running" when the minibot is loaded onto the hostbot.

The 30" height might be tricky--it depends on whether the minibot is allowed to be above the line. But substitute your favorite height in there as you need to.
__________________
Past teams:
2003-2007: FRC0330 BeachBots
2008: FRC1135 Shmoebotics
2012: FRC4046 Schroedinger's Dragons

"Rockets are tricky..."--Elon Musk

  #20   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2011, 02:39 AM
Radical Pi Radical Pi is offline
Putting the Jumper in the Bumper
AKA: Ian Thompson
FRC #0639 (Code Red Robotics)
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 655
Radical Pi has a spectacular aura aboutRadical Pi has a spectacular aura aboutRadical Pi has a spectacular aura about
Re: Minibot Standardization (FRC 2011: Logomotion)

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH View Post
#2 is the simplest. The drawbridge or a platform device is simple: move ramp/robot to either the base or the pole and let it do its thing. Telling it when to go could be as simple as a bar across the end that when released turns the minibot on or lets it go.
Probably the best way to even be unintentionally compatible with most minibots would be to have a 12x12x12 (or a little more for comfort. Bots have feelings too) box with one side open that the minibot comes out of. On the closed sides of the box would be containment bars to keep the minibot from moving. The open side would have a gap in the bars that allows them to go around the pole. When launching the bot slides out of the box with the top open and climbs

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH View Post
#1 is harder. NXT device, pure mechanical, non-NXT... Ideally, the start trigger is contained on the minibot and is "running" when the minibot is loaded onto the hostbot.
An internal limit switch that detects the pole would probably be enough, and would work with almost any design (triggers nxt program to start, closes circuit to a motor, etc)
__________________

"To have no errors would be life without meaning. No strugle, no joy"
"A network is only as strong as it's weakest linksys"
  #21   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2011, 02:57 AM
efoote868 efoote868 is offline
foote stepped in
AKA: E. Foote
FRC #0868
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Noblesville, IN
Posts: 1,372
efoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond reputeefoote868 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Minibot Standardization (FRC 2011: Logomotion)

Quick question, one to (perhaps) get people thinking:

Are you allowed to use an IR Receiver with a minibot?
(does this qualify? http://unlimited.syraweb.org/NewFTCkits.htm)

How easy is it to distribute a software module, an IR Led and some wire, and perhaps a button to teams at your regional? Will that be too much weight on their robot? How difficult will that be to install on a generic robot?


That's probably the best way I can think of to get it going. Let me know what you think.
__________________
Be Healthy. Never Stop Learning. Say It Like It Is. Own It.

Like our values? Flexware Innovation is looking for Automation Engineers. Check us out!
  #22   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2011, 11:54 AM
ChristopherBuck's Avatar
ChristopherBuck ChristopherBuck is offline
Registered User
FRC #0612
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 38
ChristopherBuck is a jewel in the roughChristopherBuck is a jewel in the roughChristopherBuck is a jewel in the rough
Re: Minibot Standardization (FRC 2011: Logomotion)

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH View Post
#2 is the simplest. The drawbridge or a platform device is simple: move ramp/robot to either the base or the pole and let it do its thing. Telling it when to go could be as simple as a bar across the end that when released turns the minibot on or lets it go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radical Pi View Post
Probably the best way to even be unintentionally compatible with most minibots would be to have a 12x12x12 (or a little more for comfort. Bots have feelings too) box with one side open that the minibot comes out of. On the closed sides of the box would be containment bars to keep the minibot from moving. The open side would have a gap in the bars that allows them to go around the pole. When launching the bot slides out of the box with the top open and climbs
Why are we specifying exactly how teams must deploy the robots? What about just standardizing that all minibots fit some X size requirement and some Y shape requirement and accept activation by some A,B, or C method and leave the rest up to individual team design? Lets not say 'All minibots must work with this drawbridge deployment mechanism' and rather leave it to everyone to create minibots that dont depend on a single deployment mechanism. Not all teams are going to use such a deployment method, so why limit the standard to just those teams?
  #23   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2011, 01:29 PM
EricH's Avatar
EricH EricH is offline
New year, new team
FRC #1197 (Torbots)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 19,703
EricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Minibot Standardization (FRC 2011: Logomotion)

We're trying to pick a system that will work with a variety of minibots to get them to the pole here. If teams put a 12"+ cube on their robots, with some form of platform that gets a minibot to the pole, it seems that that has the largest potential to accept any random minibot. That leaves activation up to the minibot users, but standardizing activation methods would be nice too.

If you standardize minibot activation on the minibot, teams have to design for that. If you standardize a deployment that can accept any minibot, and have activation be automatic on the minibot, that's easier to do.
__________________
Past teams:
2003-2007: FRC0330 BeachBots
2008: FRC1135 Shmoebotics
2012: FRC4046 Schroedinger's Dragons

"Rockets are tricky..."--Elon Musk

  #24   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2011, 02:49 PM
anyheck anyheck is offline
Registered User
FRC #2242 (Cougars)
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 26
anyheck is on a distinguished road
Re: Minibot Standardization (FRC 2011: Logomotion)

Perhaps a Bayonet - type of mounting where your robot has a delivery system,
eg a 1" square tube with a right angle end that actuates out, you can then provide a female connector to a partner team to mount on their mini-bot and make it compatible.

Bad thing is probably the need for re-inspection of the mini-bot in this case if it's done on-the-fly.

Ideally your mini-bot could be launched electrically using a Digital input or closed switch arrangement or have its own internal detection of pole contact.

Nothing says you have to make arrangements for the bot deployment at the competition, you could agree with some partner teams locally to create a regional standard.

Teams can build their bots to intentionally be traded off at the regional for the additional points any time it scores.

That's co-oper-tastic.
  #25   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2011, 02:59 PM
Grim Tuesday's Avatar
Grim Tuesday Grim Tuesday is offline
Registered User
AKA: Simon Bohn
FRC #0639 (Code Red)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: Baltimore MD (JHU)
Posts: 1,597
Grim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond reputeGrim Tuesday has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Minibot Standardization (FRC 2011: Logomotion)

What if all the standard was would be a 12x12x12, and each minibot had to include its own deployment mechanism?
  #26   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2011, 03:05 PM
Dustin Shadbolt's Avatar
Dustin Shadbolt Dustin Shadbolt is offline
In a server room somewhere...
AKA: Dustin Shadbolt
FRC #1555 (Team PULSE)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: Monticello,Indiana
Posts: 320
Dustin Shadbolt is on a distinguished road
Re: Minibot Standardization (FRC 2011: Logomotion)

This may seem stupid but how will they stop the program from running on the mini bot? I mean a simple limit switch type device would work to activate the programming for the mini bot. I had an idea of it being on the inside of the bot and once it hits the pole it just takes off. Then once we get a confirmation about if the robot can come back down just plan around that also.
  #27   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2011, 03:21 PM
EricH's Avatar
EricH EricH is offline
New year, new team
FRC #1197 (Torbots)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 19,703
EricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Minibot Standardization (FRC 2011: Logomotion)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grim Tuesday View Post
What if all the standard was would be a 12x12x12, and each minibot had to include its own deployment mechanism?
As long as the deployment mechanism was contained in the 12" cube, that'd be fine.

It's when the deployment mechanism goes outside, or when the robot's docking area isn't where the deployment mechanism needs to be to deploy right that there's a problem.

W/R/T stopping the minibot from running, I was thinking a switch at the pole as well. Activate it, and the minibot turns on. Biggest problem is the hostbots that expect the minibot to move out on its own onto the base--but another switch with a "standardish" mounting area set and a servo on the robot to activate it would probably work.
__________________
Past teams:
2003-2007: FRC0330 BeachBots
2008: FRC1135 Shmoebotics
2012: FRC4046 Schroedinger's Dragons

"Rockets are tricky..."--Elon Musk

  #28   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2011, 03:37 PM
buildmaster5000 buildmaster5000 is offline
Trying to program the swerve drive
AKA: Alex
FRC #2421 (Rolling Thunder Robotics)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: May 2009
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 207
buildmaster5000 has much to be proud ofbuildmaster5000 has much to be proud ofbuildmaster5000 has much to be proud ofbuildmaster5000 has much to be proud ofbuildmaster5000 has much to be proud ofbuildmaster5000 has much to be proud ofbuildmaster5000 has much to be proud ofbuildmaster5000 has much to be proud of
Re: Minibot Standardization (FRC 2011: Logomotion)

My idea was to use a drawer type bearing to shove the mininbot out to the pole. For the minibot, I hat the thought of haveing three wheels, arranged in a triangle, with the "tip" of the triangle on the robot side of the minibot (away from the pole). As the bot was deployed, the one wheel would be pushed back and it would mechanicly grip the pole. Once all three wheels were on the pole, the unpowered wheel would somehow trigger a switch that would tigger the other two wheels to turn on. They would stay on for 10 seconds, stop for 10 seconds, then reverse at half speed for 15 seconds.

I'm sorry in advance if it makes no sense, but I'm just throwing an idea out there...
__________________
-Alex



2010 Washington DC Regional: Engineering Excellence Award
  #29   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2011, 03:59 PM
CaptianCrunch CaptianCrunch is offline
Registered User
FRC #1712
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 3
CaptianCrunch is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Minibot Standardization (FRC 2011: Logomotion)

I feel there has been some discussion on standardizing the minibots. Some people, donrotolo and darist, have expressed a desire for somebody to take the initiative in coming up with an open standard minibot. We want everyone to have freedom within the one foot cube, but we want to be able to expect some common way to mount the minibot to the host bot in a way it can be delivered on a pole.

Building on the comments by caffel I believe these could be the four criteria we need to keep in mind

1) Box/envelope/open top

2) Delivery platform (minibot doesn’t fall out of host bot)

3) Delivery (because currently it appears that our robot and minibot will be in contact with the pole the max hight of deployment is 18in)

4) Attach/ launch

We at 1712 would like to propose the acronym for the standardization, CLIMBS (Committee Leading the Initiative for MiniBot Standardization). Post fast we only have 10 seconds to the top
  #30   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-09-2011, 04:57 PM
James Tonthat James Tonthat is offline
Registered User
FRC #0148 (Robowranglers)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: Greenville, TX
Posts: 303
James Tonthat has a reputation beyond reputeJames Tonthat has a reputation beyond reputeJames Tonthat has a reputation beyond reputeJames Tonthat has a reputation beyond reputeJames Tonthat has a reputation beyond reputeJames Tonthat has a reputation beyond reputeJames Tonthat has a reputation beyond reputeJames Tonthat has a reputation beyond reputeJames Tonthat has a reputation beyond reputeJames Tonthat has a reputation beyond reputeJames Tonthat has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Minibot Standardization (FRC 2011: Logomotion)

I'm working on something right now, I'll post in a bit with what I get.
__________________
James Tonthat

Mechanical Engineer, RackSolutions, a subsidiary of Innovation First International

Lead Engineer - Texas Torque - 2009-2014
Mentor - Robowranglers - 2015-
Closed Thread


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:24 PM.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi