Fixed Angle vs. Adjustable angle Shooter

[Muffinz]

So team 88 is faced with the decision to make our shooter mechanism at a fixed angle and adjust velocity of the balls.

OR

Make the shooter mechanism able to adjust up and down to change the angle. This would also require a change in the velocity at which the ball is fired.


Personally i believe it should be at a fixed angle and only adjust the velocity of the ball to preserve simplicity but some of my teammates disagree.

I was just wondering what the robot community thought on the matter.

Thanks,
Team 88

[tim-tim]

401 is in the same predicament. We started testing tonight at different locations and distances to make more than an educated guess. Right now we are still nowhere close to a verdict, but hope to reach one by Saturday night.

I highly recommend that you get a quick test plan and test different angles. Even if it means jacking the front end of your robot up to achieve different angles of departure. We were surprised with some of the responses we got. We found that sometimes the 'sweetspot' was achieved more effectively at much lower speeds than we had anticipated.

Just some food for thought. Do the engineering behind it and test your assumptions. Some will be right and some will be wrong, but that is ok. Just remember to take multiple shots from the same data set (i.e. angle and speed setting)

Goodluck and I will see you guys at Chesapeake with The RoboBees

[SenorZ]

3677 feels it would be much easier to adjust the speed (accurately?) than to adjust the angle... for us anyway.

[Cal578]

We're facing the same dilemma, and attempting to make the decision within the next couple of days. The main disadvantage we see to a fixed-tilt shooter is the need for a moderate take-off angle at the key and beyond (30-45 degrees) versus a steep angle if we wanted to make a high basket from up close, like touching the fender (75-85 degrees). Not that we're pursuing a strategy of scoring from all over the field; we're just trying not to limit our choices too early in the season.

[billbo911]

Again, we too faced this same question.
Because simplicity is one of our key goals in designing our system, we really had to decide which would give us the greatest control.

We knew we already needed a way to have reliable RPM for the shooter, so we choose to go with that for our primary control over distance.

Once we prototyped a couple of different designs, we also decided to add a two position hood.

So, our final solution.......both.

[Tom I]

My team sees a little bit of benefit to being able to adjust the angle of the shot, even if it is just 45* OR 75*, we want there to be some control over it. We prototyped some designs for throwers, and now that we've got one that we like, we're in the process of constructing a fixed 45* thrower, just to have a final, to-spec design that we can pass off to the programming sub-team. This way they can start getting the measurements they need to calibrate aiming code, and while they're doing that the mechanical sub-team will get to work on building a variable angle "hood" (for lack of better term). It should be interesting how each team solves the same problem!

[TerryS]

We decided on a fixed angle. Our prototype shot well up close and from the top of the key at 60 degrees. We're going to try 70 degrees today to compare.

[KennyLives]

Probably adjust the shooter up and down to aim. It's more complex, but I say more accurate and easier to aim.

[j.maguire25]

Our team decided on a fixed angle with adjustable speed. It would be simpler in the sense of using less motor's and etc. You would need more motors, gears, pistons, POWER, and whatever else you are using to cause the platform to raise, and to make the pitching devices speed adjustable. Also, making more things move and adjust leaves more room for mistakes.