Why didn't we think of that?

[davidfv]

I am doing a small project and would like some help. Every year, we see a robot feature, system, programming, or unique strategy that really helps a team. Sometimes it is very simple and others are pretty complicated and take some team skill and experience. No matter what it is, we look at that design and wonder if that would have made your robot a lot better. I am looking for those hidden features or characteristics of a robot or team.

So please tell about a unique feature of a robot, a team, or a strategy that made you say: ""Why didn't we think of that?"

Please tell me the team number and feature.

If I get enough responses, I will come back with a follow-up and maybe help you answer the question.

[ratdude747]

469 and 51 in 2010. Also any Direct drive minibot in 2011.

[apalrd]

A few good ones:

-Several teams in 2012 were able to use a single mechanism to do many tasks, a great example of this is 67's utility arm.

-The minibot ramps in 2011 (inspired mostly by 233), along with the direct-drive minibot was one of the most copied in season designs I have seen in FRC.

I'll probably think of more, this is what I have so far.

[IKE]

Catapults in 2008 (1114, 1625, 16, and 118 were good examples). I know why my team didn't think about that, but it may be good for others to do that exercise.

2010: 67 after the buzzer lift or the 254&1114 3 second lift. Our lift was fast and accurrate, but 67, 1114, and 254 were in another league with the after the buzzer and PTO style lifters.

2011, the doubler roller claw with hinged jaw was popular on many top teams (111, 1114, 254, 33, 177?) and not present on lower performers (yes there were many good roller claws, and many good hinged claws, but only a handful of double roller hinged claws).

This year, Over the bumper collection 2012 (469, 341 I believe were good examples as well as many others).
2012: Stingers/Bridge assisters.

[roystur44]

Here is a little circuit that helped the team out testing our prototypes and robot builds. I had been asking to purchase a high amp variable DC power supply $$$ to run motors while testing our prototypes without hooking up a crio, programming and all the electronics needed. Brian Silverman and his dad told me there is a easier way and drew up this circuit on a napkin and later made the box. What it does is generate a PWM signal that is variable with the use of a pot. We can safely control motor speed with a Jag or Victor without hooking up all the electronics.

I can't tell you how great a device this thing is. I saw so many shooter videos where people just touched bare wires to a battery to get their shooter motor runnning.

https://plus.google.com/photos/10454...394?banner=pwa

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibuAAnxgExQ

[Ross3098]

+ 1 - Team 67's hanging mechanism in 2010. I mean come on, scoring a hang AFTER the buzzer??

This year 469's ball intake doubled as a rebound catcher. I also believe 548,330, and 1504 deserve mention. Their ball intake and shooters were integrated into the same system.

[Gary Dillard]

This year team 180 hooked up a "photon cannon" (aka, bright flashlight) to aim at the backboard, which they found gave much better realtime feedback to the driver of his target aim point than the camera (and reduced the amount of data they had to send through the radio). Team 25 saw the design at the Orlando Regional and copied it with fairly decent success.

[BrendanB]

Originally Posted by Gary Dillard

This year team 180 hooked up a "photon cannon" (aka, bright flashlight) to aim at the backboard, which they found gave much better realtime feedback to the driver of his target aim point than the camera (and reduced the amount of data they had to send through the radio). Team 25 saw the design at the Orlando Regional and copied it with fairly decent success.

Correct me if I am wrong, they used a bright flashlight to shine on the target and lined up visually with said target instead of using camera tracking?

I wish we could have redone our drop down intake to double as skid plates for going over the bump like 233, 33, or even powerful enough to lift ourselves over the bump like 67. I felt like we spent a lot of time working on a custom frame to cross the bump which paid off, but it would have been a lot easier to use the kit frame and put more effort into the intake/bump crossing mechanism.

[MIT_MAN]

Originally Posted by BrendanB

Correct me if I am wrong, they used a bright flashlight to shine on the target and lined up visually with said target instead of using camera tracking?

I wish we could have redone our drop down intake to double as skid plates for going over the bump like 233, 33, or even powerful enough to lift ourselves over the bump like 67. I felt like we spent a lot of time working on a custom frame to cross the bump which paid off, but it would have been a lot easier to use the kit frame and put more effort into the intake/bump crossing mechanism.

Us (25) and SPAM were the Flashlight alliance! haha And yes, the flashlight/headlight would paint a bright beam (or spot in SPAM's case) on the backboard and we both used these lights quite effectively to line up our shooters. The incredibly bright beams (We used a 100 watt halogen headlight and spam a modified maglite flashlight), combined with the reflective tape on the backboards, made it a very viable and effective strategy.

[BrendanB]

Originally Posted by MIT_MAN

Us (25) and SPAM were the Flashlight alliance! haha And yes, the flashlight/headlight would paint a bright beam (or spot in SPAM's case) on the backboard and we both used these lights quite effectively to line up our shooters. The incredibly bright beams (We used a 100 watt halogen headlight and spam a modified maglite flashlight), combined with the reflective tape on the backboards, made it a very viable and effective strategy.

Thanks! Our team didn't have vision tracking working this season so we did a manual line up with a yellow flagpole mounted on the robot. Ingenious idea using a flashlight to light up the target!

[Grim Tuesday]

I started a thread on this a while back, but it seems that every year, there is a feature/design that is missed by the vast majority of teams.

In 2012 they were:

• Drop Down Intake
• Stinger
• Traction on the bridge

In 2011 they were:

• Minibot pre-deployment/ramp
• Taking the gearboxes off of the minibot
• Roller claws or other active tube acquisition device

In 2010 they were:

• Tunnel traversing
• Hanging off the side of the tower
• Active ball possession device

[Alexa Stott]

Originally Posted by BrendanB

Thanks! Our team didn't have vision tracking working this season so we did a manual line up with a yellow flagpole mounted on the robot. Ingenious idea using a flashlight to light up the target!

We worked very closely with our friends on team 103 this year. As a programmer, I worked a lot on their robot as well as ours and they actually had the camera on it for vision tracking (though that particular bit of programming was done by Bharat Nain). Their drive coach also really liked being able to see the camera feed during the match. We considered implementing it on ours after a rough showing in Orlando, but decided not to after our first few matches at Lenape (our first event with the headlight) went well.

It was really awesome to be paired up with SPAM at Championships as that design decision completely turned around our season and was a huge factor in use even qualifying for CMP this year (of course, we also could not have done it without our excellent alliance partners at Mt. Olive and MAR Champs).

Back on topic:

In 2009, we sort of missed the mark with our robot design. We had a shooter that could only shoot one ball at a time. It was accurate, but we just could not compete with all the dumper bots who would score 10 balls in 2 seconds.

[slijin]

Originally Posted by Grim Tuesday

In 2011 they were:

• Minibot pre-deployment/ramp
• Taking the gearboxes off of the minibot
• Roller claws or other active tube acquisition device

In 2010 they were:

• Tunnel traversing
• Hanging off the side of the tower

In 2011, the opening dual roller claw was the real deal. Rotation allowed teams to deliver tubes no matter what orientation they were acquired with, and the opening allowed them to drop tubes onto the pegs.

In 2010, 469 took the cake with their redirector; quick hangers, especially 67's passive one, were also arguably the best ones.

From what I've seen/heard, 2009 was the year where rapid ball dispensing, as opposed to a turret, was the better option.

[AllenGregoryIV]

Originally Posted by MIT_MAN

Us (25) and SPAM were the Flashlight alliance! haha And yes, the flashlight/headlight would paint a bright beam (or spot in SPAM's case) on the backboard and we both used these lights quite effectively to line up our shooters. The incredibly bright beams (We used a 100 watt halogen headlight and spam a modified maglite flashlight), combined with the reflective tape on the backboards, made it a very viable and effective strategy.

Can you explain how this works? Were you looking through the driver station feed or at the backboard itself? (the latter seems difficult to me with the nature of the retro-reflective tape)

[Kristian Calhoun]

Originally Posted by AllenGregoryIV

Can you explain how this works? Were you looking through the driver station feed or at the backboard itself? (the latter seems difficult to me with the nature of the retro-reflective tape)

We had no camera on our robot and did not rely on the retro-reflective tape (though it did help increase visibility). Our headlight projected a vertical beam of light that our driver used to visually align the robot with the goal using the light's reflection off of the backboard itself.